get_gas_fees

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden, but it only says 'Alias for m2m_get_gas_metrics.' This implies behavioral equivalence to another tool but gives no direct information about side effects, return values, availability, or safety. It is minimally informative but not self-contained.

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 short sentence that says exactly what is necessary for an alias tool: which canonical tool it maps to. There is no filler, and the key information 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 zero-parameter alias with no output schema, the description is adequate as a pointer to m2m_get_gas_metrics. However, it does not describe what the tool returns or what behavior the agent should expect, leaving the agent dependent on the canonical tool's documentation.

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 zero parameters, and the schema already indicates an empty properties object. The description adds no parameter meaning, but none is needed; the zero-parameter baseline of 4 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 explicitly states the tool is an alias for m2m_get_gas_metrics, which tells an agent exactly which sibling tool provides the real behavior. This is more informative than a tautology, though it still relies on the canonical tool's definition for the precise get-gas-fees semantics.

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 alias relationship implicitly tells the agent to use this tool interchangeably with m2m_get_gas_metrics. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this alias over other sibling tools or when not to use it.

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