get_events_by_block_number

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context about pagination via limit/fingerprint and the ability to do full event retrieval, which goes beyond the annotations. However, it does not describe the return format or any network-specific behaviors.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then pagination, then the comparison to a sibling. No wasted words.

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 read-only, paginated event query with full schema coverage and strong annotations, the description is sufficient. It provides the core purpose, pagination support, and comparison to an alternative. No output schema exists, but the description's conciseness and the tool's simplicity keep it complete.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description mentions limit and fingerprint in the context of pagination, which adds a small amount of semantic linkage between them, but largely repeats what the schema provides. Baseline of 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 clearly states the tool gets events for a specific block, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from get_events_of_latest_block by noting it's preferred for precise block targeting and full event retrieval.

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 explicitly names get_events_of_latest_block as an alternative and states when this tool is preferred. This gives clear context for selecting between them, though it doesn't discuss other sibling event tools.

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