explorer_get_token_supply

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint: true) already establish the non-destructive nature. The description adds the historical block context, but does not disclose return format, token decimal handling, or potential edge cases. It provides some value beyond annotations but not rich behavioral detail.

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, clear sentence that conveys the core purpose and the key optional behavior. No filler or redundant elaboration.

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 simple read-only nature, the description is largely adequate. It covers the main function and the historical variant. However, with no output schema, it does not explicitly state the return format (e.g., raw integer or string), which would ideally be included for full completeness.

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 all parameters have clear descriptions. The description's mention of 'optional historical block' is redundant with the blockNumber schema description, so it does not add meaningful semantic value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clear action 'Get' and a specific resource 'total supply of a token', with an optional historical block qualifier. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like explorer_get_native_supply by focusing on tokens and historical 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 both latest and historical token supply queries, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like get_token_total_supply or explorer_get_native_supply. The historical block mention gives a hint but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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