Get GenLayer Contract Snapshot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint as true. The description adds the context of returning three components (state, code, schema). There is no contradiction, and the description is consistent with the safe, idempotent behavior.

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, concise sentence that communicates the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words or repetition.

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 read-only snapshot tool with well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys that the response includes state, code, and schema. It could be slightly more explicit about the structure or potential optionality of each component, but overall it's 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?

The input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, detailing address, status, and blockNumber. The description does not add any semantic value beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the specific resources: contract state, deployed code, and derived schema. It explicitly distinguishes itself from individual retrieval tools like genlayer_get_contract_state, genlayer_get_contract_code, and genlayer_get_contract_schema by offering a combined snapshot.

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 efficient combined retrieval but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions.

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