Build 8DX Explorer Link

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that order hashes are not chain transactions and will be explained rather than linked, which is a meaningful behavioral trait. However, it does not mention return format (e.g., URL or message), error handling, or any required permissions, leaving some gaps.

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 sentence that starts with the action verb and resource, then lists the accepted value types and the special order-hash behavior. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the main purpose and the special case. It could explicitly state the return format (e.g., a URL string), but the agent can infer it from 'builds a link'. Overall, it is complete enough for correct invocation.

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 100%, with each parameter having a description and two parameters having enums. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Builds' and a distinct resource: 'chain-specific block explorer link'. It enumerates the value types (transaction, address, token, order) and clearly differentiates from sibling tools that handle swaps, orders, or wallet sessions. The special case for order hashes further clarifies its 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 implies when to use the tool: whenever a block explorer link is needed for a transaction, address, token, or order hash. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but no sibling tool serves this purpose, so the context is clear. The note about order hashes being explained rather than linked gives a useful exclusion.

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