explorer_get_daily_block_rewards

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond what the name and schema already convey. It does not disclose return format, aggregation details, pagination, or any limitations, and the phrase 'daily block rewards' merely restates the tool name with no additional behavioral characteristics.

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, direct sentence ('Get daily block rewards for a date range.') with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word contributes to the core purpose, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

With a simple schema, read-only annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate for a basic query but lacks critical details such as the response structure, units of the rewards, or whether the data is aggregated per day or per block. While the input side is well-covered, the lack of any output/behavioral detail leaves the agent uncertain about returned data.

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 schema provides full descriptions for all four parameters (chainId, startDate, endDate, sort) with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to elaborate. The description only loosely mentions 'date range', which maps to startDate/endDate, but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's built-in descriptions.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'daily block rewards' with a date-range scope, which provides a specific action and differentiates from the sibling tool explorer_get_block_rewards (which is not daily). However, it does not explicitly name an alternative or explain the aggregation semantics beyond the name, leaving slight ambiguity about what 'daily' means in the returned 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?

The description implies usage for date-range queries via 'for a date range' and the required startDate/endDate parameters, but it provides no explicit context on when to use this tool versus explorer_get_block_rewards or other explorer tools. There are no exclusion statements or named alternatives, so the guidance is only implicit from the phrasing.

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