get_btc_tx_history

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

The description discloses key behavioral details beyond annotations: the exact fields returned (txid, sats, fee, block height/time, RBF flag), the RBF eligibility condition, and the pagination limit. Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent, and the description adds no contradiction.

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?

Two sentences pack all essential information: purpose, returned fields, behavioral notes, defaults, and page limit. No extraneous words; highly efficient.

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?

Despite missing output schema, the description lists all returned fields and explains key details (RBF flag, pagination). The tool is simple and fully covered for agent decision-making.

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%, but the description adds significant value: for 'address' it enumerates accepted formats and explicitly excludes testnets; for 'limit' it states default and page cap. This enriches the schema definitions.

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 explicitly states it provides 'recent Bitcoin transaction history for a single address (newest-first)', clearly identifying the verb, resource, and scope. It differentiates from sibling tools (e.g., get_btc_balance) by focusing on transaction history.

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?

While not explicitly contrasting with alternatives, the description clearly defines the tool's purpose and limitations (e.g., 'Default 25 txs, capped at 50 (one Esplora page); pagination beyond is a follow-up'). This implicitly guides agents on when to use this tool for paginated queries.

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