arb_gas_prices

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses that it returns a gas price breakdown (a read operation), but does not mention data freshness, caching, or if it incurs network costs. For a simple query, this is adequate but not thorough.

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?

One sentence, efficiently listing each component. Could be slightly tighter (e.g., remove 'and the' before base fee), but overall well-structured and front-loaded with the main purpose.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description explains what is returned. However, it does not specify the denomination (e.g., wei) or the structure (object vs array). This is a minor gap, but the description is largely complete for an agent's selection.

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?

No parameters exist, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds full semantic value by enumerating the returned components, which is essential since the input schema is empty.

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 'Full gas price breakdown from ArbGasInfo' and lists specific components: per-L2-tx, per-L1-calldata-byte, per storage allocation, and base fee. This distinguishes it from siblings like gas_price (simpler) and other arb_* tools.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and description: use when you need a detailed gas price breakdown. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or comparisons to sibling tools like arb_min_gas_price.

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