Live gas across chains (ethereum, base, arbitrum, optimism, polygon): current gas price, next-block base fee, slow/standard/fast priority-fee tiers straight from chain RPC, native token USD price, and the USD cost of a simple transfer so chains compare without unit math. Paid tool: $0.001 per call via x402 (USDC on Base).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| chains | No | Chains to query; omit for all supported chains |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses output fields (gas price, base fee, priority tiers, USD prices) and source (chain RPC). Does not mention read-only nature, rate limits, or caching, but covers key behavioral aspects.
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?
One sentence conveying all key information (chains, output, pricing). Front-loaded with main purpose. Slightly dense but efficient; could be broken into two sentences for readability.
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?
No output schema, but description fully explains return values (gas price, base fee, priority fees, native token price, USD transfer cost). Includes pricing and chains. Complete for a simple query tool with one optional parameter.
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?
Single parameter 'chains' is already well-described in schema with enum values and default behavior. Description adds value by explicitly listing the chains and noting that omission returns all chains, enhancing clarity.
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?
Clear verb+resource: 'Live gas across chains' specifies the action (get gas prices) and the resource (chains: ethereum, base, arbitrum, optimism, polygon). Distinguishes from siblings (crypto_prices, defi_tvl, etc.) by focusing on gas metrics.
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?
States it's a paid tool with cost per call, which guides usage decisions. Lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, but the domain (gas prices) is distinct from siblings, making usage obvious.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct data domain: crypto_prices for spot prices, defi_tvl for DeFi TVL, gas_prices for gas fees, and service_info for server details. No overlap in purpose.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern with two words: crypto_prices, defi_tvl, gas_prices, service_info. Predictable and readable.
4 tools for a real-time crypto data server is well-scoped. Each tool serves a clear and essential sub-domain without being too few or too many.
The set covers core real-time crypto data needs: spot prices, DeFi TVL, gas fees, and service information. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose.