blockrun_rpc

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

Discloses cost ($0.002 per call), batch behavior, and behavior for unknown network slugs (pass through to Tatum gateway). Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description aligns by not restricting operations. Could be improved by explicitly noting that some RPC methods can modify state.

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?

Highly concise and well-structured. Uses bullet points and examples to convey information efficiently. Every sentence adds value, and the description is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 tool with 5 parameters (full coverage), no output schema, and existing annotations, the description is comprehensive. It covers usage guidelines, examples, cost, alternative tools, and even notes the full network list is in the rpc skill. No gaps given the tool's nature.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds context beyond schema: explains relationship between 'body' and 'method'/'params', provides usage examples showing parameter combinations, and describes behavior of 'body' for batch calls. Adds value without repeating schema.

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?

Clearly states it is a raw JSON-RPC interface for 40+ blockchains, with specific verb 'Raw JSON-RPC' and resource '40+ blockchains'. Distinguishes from siblings by saying it is for data not covered by higher-level tools, and provides examples of use cases.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when you need data the higher-level tools don't cover') and when to prefer alternatives (blockrun_price, blockrun_dex, blockrun_surf). Provides concrete usage examples for different chains and methods.

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