fetch_contract

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

No annotations provided; the description only says 'fetch', implying a read operation. It lacks disclosure of potential rate limits, authentication needs, or whether the data is always up-to-date. Minimal behavioral context.

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 sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose. No filler or redundant information.

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?

The description states the output (source code and ABI) but does not specify the format (e.g., JSON) or potential error conditions. For a simple fetch tool, it is mostly adequate but could include a hint about the response 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?

Both parameters have clear descriptions in the input schema (address and chain). The description does not add any extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, such as format or examples.

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 'fetch', the resource 'verified smart contract source code and ABI', and the data source 'Blockscout', distinguishing it from sibling tools like audit_contract.

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 retrieving smart contract code and ABI, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for audits use audit_contract). No when-not-to-use advice.

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