explorer_get_block

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description only needs to add context. It does mention the return contents (gas consumption, rewards, optional tx list) but does not disclose additional behaviors like pagination, response size, or cost. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single, tightly written sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then efficiently lists the key data points. No filler or repetition.

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 read-only tool with two well-described parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys what the tool returns. It does not mention the option to request the full transaction list (e.g., via a parameter), but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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%, and both parameters (chainId, blockNumber) have clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('block information') and enumerates specific contents (gas consumption, rewards, optionally full transaction list), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like explorer_get_block_rewards (rewards only) and evm_get_block (generic block data).

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?

Usage context is implied by the description: use when you need block-level data with gas/rewards and optionally transactions. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives (e.g., explorer_get_block_by_timestamp, evm_get_block), nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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