dero_get_block_header_by_hash

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

Annotations already mark it read-only and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by noting the response omits the block body and showing the output shape { block_header: {...} }. No contradiction 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?

Four short labeled sections—purpose, when-to-call, input requirement, output—with no filler. Every sentence earns its place and the key scoping is front-loaded.

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 single-required-parameter read tool, the description covers purpose, invocation condition, alternative tool, strict input format, and output shape. Nothing an agent needs to select and call it correctly is missing.

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 the only parameter fully (pattern, type, required, description), so the baseline is 3. The description restates the 64-hex requirement and gives example source context ('from a tx confirmation'), adding emphasis but little new semantic information beyond the 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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a block header by its 64-char hex hash', and clarifies it returns the header without the full block body. This distinguishes it from dero_get_block and the topo-height variant.

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 you have a block hash ... need its header without the full block body') and names dero_get_block as the alternative when txs or miner_tx are also needed. This gives an agent clear routing guidance.

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