agentek-eth

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states a read operation ('Get'), implying no destructive effects, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or output format. This is insufficient for a tool that interacts with blockchain data, where such behavioral traits are critical.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently states the core action without unnecessary elaboration.

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 tool's complexity (blockchain bytecode retrieval), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not address key aspects like return format, error cases, or dependencies, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand and use the tool effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema provides no parameter details. The description mentions 'address' but does not explain its format (e.g., Ethereum address) or the purpose of 'chainId'. It adds minimal semantic value beyond naming one parameter, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 'Get the bytecode of an address' specifies a verb ('Get') and resource ('bytecode of an address'), making the purpose clear. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'getSmartContract' or 'getAddressInfo', which might also retrieve contract-related data, leaving ambiguity in differentiation.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools for blockchain data (e.g., 'getSmartContract', 'getAddressInfo'), there is no indication of specific contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving usage unclear.

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