eth_gasPrice

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns a value but doesn't mention if it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or details the return format (e.g., numeric wei value). This leaves significant gaps for a tool in a blockchain 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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core functionality ('Returns the current price per gas in wei'), making it immediately clear and easy to parse.

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?

Given the complexity of blockchain tools and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the return value format (e.g., integer wei), potential errors, or behavioral traits like network dependencies, leaving the agent with incomplete context for reliable use.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so no parameter information is needed. The description appropriately omits parameter details, focusing on the tool's purpose, which aligns with the baseline for zero parameters.

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 specific action ('Returns') and resource ('current price per gas in wei'), distinguishing it from siblings like eth_blockNumber or eth_estimateGas. It precisely defines what the tool does without being vague or tautological.

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 when needing the current gas price, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., eth_estimateGas for transaction-specific estimates) or any exclusions. It lacks named alternatives or contextual boundaries.

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