tx_raw_prevout_get

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are present, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states what the tool returns without mentioning side effects, permissions, rate limits, or potential destructive actions. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand behavioral implications.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. No extraneous information. Could be slightly improved by mentioning output format, but it is efficiently structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the single required parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and what it returns. However, it lacks details on output format (e.g., JSON or hex) and does not mention pagination or limits, leaving minor gaps for a complete understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage and only defines txid as a string. The description mentions 'transaction ID' but adds no format validation, example, or constraints beyond the schema. It contributes minimal additional meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves a raw Bitcoin transaction with prevout information by transaction ID. It specifies the resource (raw transaction with prevout) and the verb (get), distinguishing it from siblings like tx_raw_hex_get that likely return hex without prevout.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as transaction_get or tx_raw_hex_get. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.