Retrieve a Stellar transaction by hash from a chosen network to inspect details and verify status.
Fetch a transaction from the network by hash
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| network | Yes | Stellar network | |
| tx_hash | Yes | Transaction hash to fetch |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. 'Fetch' implies a read-only network retrieval, which is useful, but the description stops short of permissions, error behavior, rate limits, or return characteristics.
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?
A single sentence with no wasted words, and the key action and resource are front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool.
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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, the definition is minimally complete. It omits output shape and usage context, which is a gap because no output schema exists to explain return values.
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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented. The description only echoes 'by hash' for tx_hash and does not add meaning for the network parameter, making the baseline 3 appropriate.
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?
States a specific verb ('Fetch'), resource ('transaction'), and lookup key ('by hash'). It distinguishes network retrieval from local siblings like stellar_tx_decode or stellar_tx_hash, though it does not name them explicitly.
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 when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no exclusions are provided. The phrase 'by hash' implies the required input but not the context for choosing this tool over sibling transaction tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.