get_tx_verification

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

Annotations already provided readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds behavioral context: the handle's 15-minute in-memory lifetime and that the response matches the original prepare_* call exactly, which annotations do not cover.

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 three concise sentences: purpose, usage guidance, and behavioral note. No wasted words, and the critical information is front-loaded.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, constraints, and behavior. It does not detail output shape but states it matches original prepare_* call, which is sufficient.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the parameter description is detailed, adding value beyond the schema. The description also adds the 15-minute lifetime context, enhancing understanding of handle usage.

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 re-emits the prepared-tx JSON and VERIFY-BEFORE-SIGNING block for a known handle, distinguishing it from sibling prepare_* tools that create these entities. It specifies the exact resource and action.

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?

Explicitly advises when to use (when original prepare_* output drops from context) and when not to (NEVER recover from disk), providing an alternative (call this tool instead). Also mentions the 15-minute in-memory lifetime.

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