NOVAI chain status

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

No annotations are provided, but the description fully discloses that this is a read-only operation that returns chain status. It lists all the returned fields, and does not mention any destructive side effects. The behavior is completely transparent.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: first states what it returns, second gives usage guidance, third confirms no parameters. No redundant or unclear phrases.

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 (no input, no output schema), the description covers everything an agent needs: the exact output fields, the purpose (verify liveness, get tip height), and the fact it takes no parameters. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the description clearly states 'Takes no parameters.' With 100% schema coverage (trivially), the description adds no extra param info but confirms the emptiness. For 0 params, baseline is 4, and the description's clarity earns a 5.

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 explicitly states the tool returns the latest committed block of the NOVAI chain, listing the fields returned (height, hash, etc.) and the verb 'Return'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like novai_get_block which retrieves a specific block.

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 explicit guidance: 'Use this to verify the chain is live and advancing, and to learn the current tip height before requesting a specific block.' This tells the agent when to use this tool and implies when not to (for specific blocks).

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