Find the cheapest EVM chain across 9 networks before transacting. Covers Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, BNB, Polygon, Avalanche, zkSync & Hyperliquid; returns the cheapest chain with savings % for cross-chain routing decisions. Use when you need the widest chain coverage to route a tx to the lowest-fee network. $0.002 USDC via x402 on Base, no API key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It discloses the output (cheapest chain with savings percentage) and transaction cost ($0.002 USDC via x402). While it does not detail read-only nature or refresh behavior, it provides sufficient information about what the tool does and its cost implications.
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 extremely concise with three sentences. It front-loads the core functionality, lists networks, describes output, and includes usage guidance and cost—all without extraneous words. Every sentence serves a purpose.
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 there is no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (cheapest chain and savings percentage). It also covers the cost and usage context. However, more detail on the exact format of the response could improve completeness.
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 input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter information. Baseline 4 is appropriate; the description adds no param details, but none are needed.
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 clearly identifies the tool's purpose: finding the cheapest EVM chain among 9 networks. It lists the specific networks and mentions returning the cheapest chain with savings percentage. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_cheapest_chain and get_gas_basic/demo, which likely have narrower scope.
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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use when you need the widest chain coverage to route a tx to the lowest-fee network.' This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast with alternatives.
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 has a clearly distinct purpose: get_cheapest_chain gives a direct recommendation, get_gas_basic and get_gas_premium provide comparisons over different chain sets, and get_gas_demo offers free rate-limited data. No overlap in functionality.
Most tools follow the pattern get_gas_* (basic, demo, premium), but get_cheapest_chain breaks the pattern by omitting 'gas'. However, all names are clear and use snake_case with descriptive verbs.
Four tools is appropriate for a focused gas optimizer server: a direct recommendation, two comparison tiers (basic and premium), and a free demo. No excess or missing essential functionality.
The set covers the core need of finding the cheapest EVM chain with different coverage levels and pricing tiers. A gap might be the lack of historical gas data or per-chain detailed info, but for the stated purpose it's adequately complete.