get_block_by_limit_next

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds useful context about the inclusive/exclusive range semantics, but does not disclose potential pagination behavior or limits, though these are less critical given the read-only nature.

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 is concise, front-loaded, and directly communicates the primary function. It contains no unnecessary words or repetition of schema details.

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 list tool with strong annotations and a fully documented schema, the description is adequate. It explains the range semantics and what is returned. However, the tool's name 'limit_next' hints at possible pagination or limit behavior that is not addressed, and there is no output schema to clarify the exact return structure.

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%, so the parameters are already well-documented in the schema with their inclusive/exclusive meanings. The description adds minimal additional meaning beyond stating the range, which is essentially a restatement of the parameter 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 tool retrieves a list of block objects within a specified inclusive/exclusive range. It uses a specific verb ('Retrieve'), names the resource ('block objects'), and defines the scope with the [startNum, endNum) notation, distinguishing it from sibling tools that fetch single blocks by num/id or the latest block.

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 its use for fetching a range of blocks, giving clear context on the input range. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternative tools for single-block queries.

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