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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that data comes from the node's on-chain network scope and that access is paid via x402 credit pack or API key. It does not state whether estimation is deterministic, latency, or rate limits, leaving a small gap.

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?

Three compact sentences: calculation, when to use, when not to use. Front-loaded with the core operation, though the mixed-language formatting is slightly less scannable than plain English.

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 an estimation tool with no output schema, the description names all return values (daily/monthly gross/net, break-even price, payback days), which is exactly the needed context. It omits precision or currency handling caveats, but is largely complete.

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%, so parameters are already documented in the schema; the description adds no syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific calculation with named outputs: daily/monthly gross and net earnings, break-even electricity price, and payback days, from given hashrate and power/cost. It is a forward-looking estimator, clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like xmr_fee_oracle or xmr_verify_payment.

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?

Explicitly gives when to use (deciding whether to mine, which machine to buy, acceptable electricity price) and when not to use (querying historical earnings, since this is an estimate not a settlement). This direct routing is rare and valuable.

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