get_state_for_tx

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only states the basic function. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, any permissions required, rate limits, or what 'indexed state writes' entails. Behavioral traits are missing.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loading the purpose. It could be slightly more informative without losing brevity, but it is efficient overall.

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 tool has one parameter, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what 'state writes' are, the output format, or how the result relates to the transaction. More detail is needed for effective use.

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% for the single parameter 'tx_hash', which is described as 'Transaction hash'. The description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline but not adding value.

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 'List indexed state writes produced by a transaction' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool lists state writes for a transaction. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_state' and 'get_state_for_block' which likely retrieve state differently.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_state' or 'get_state_for_block'. The description does not mention when it's appropriate or not to use it, leaving the agent to infer usage from the title and context.

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