Precio del gas actual en gwei.
Args:
red: `base` o `ethereum`.
Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {
"red": "<red>"
},
"name": "gas"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| red | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns the current gas price in gwei, implying a read-only query, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, permissions, rate limits, or error behavior.
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?
Extremely concise and front-loaded: the core purpose and unit come first, followed by the only parameter's accepted values. No wasted text.
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 a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states the returned value and unit and documents the parameter values. It lacks explicit usage guidance and read-only/behavioral assurances, but the complexity is low.
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 description coverage is 0% and the single parameter has no schema-level description. The description compensates well by naming the parameter and listing its allowed values: `base` or `ethereum`, though it does not explicitly say these represent networks.
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?
States a clear and specific resource: current gas price in gwei. It implicitly distinguishes current gas price from historical price via 'actual', but does not explicitly name sibling alternatives such as historico_precio or precio.
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?
Provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The word 'actual' implies current rather than historical pricing, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are stated.
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.