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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The word 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose potential side effects, network defaults, or error behavior. It adds no behavioral context beyond the basic action, which is minimal but not misleading.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose without unnecessary detail.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate. It clearly states what it does, but it does not explain the return value format or any error cases. For a simple height getter, this is a minor gap.

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?

The schema covers the single parameter 'network' with an enum and a description ('Avalanche network to query (default: mainnet)'), giving 100% schema_description_coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Get the current P-Chain block height' clearly specifies the verb 'Get' and the exact resource (current P-Chain block height). It distinguishes from sibling tools like platform_get_block_by_height, which retrieves a specific block by height, and platform_get_block, which fetches block data.

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?

The description provides clear context that this tool is for retrieving the current height on the P-Chain. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous. Sibling tools like platform_get_block_by_height for historical blocks are not referenced, so there is no exclusion guidance.

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