dero_get_block

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds critical behavioral details: that providing both or neither parameter returns an error, the exact length constraint for hash, and the non-negative integer constraint for height. It also lists output fields. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Description is well-structured with clear sections (when to call, input requirements, output). Every sentence adds value, no repetition or fluff. Approximately 150 words—efficient and front-loaded with key info.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists all expected output fields (block_header, miner_tx, txs, topo position). It also includes parameter constraints and error conditions. For a block fetch tool of this complexity, the description is fully sufficient.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds crucial mutual exclusivity logic ('exactly ONE of hash or height') and format constraints beyond the schema's pattern. This prevents common invocation errors.

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' and resource 'full block', and distinguishes from sibling tools like dero_get_block_header_by_hash. The phrase 'by height OR hash' specifies the lookup methods.

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 call ('when investigating a specific block or verifying a transaction's inclusion'), advises to call dero_get_height first if lacking target height, and suggests using dero_docs_search for field semantics. Provides clear usage boundaries.

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