Get Supported Chains

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: the endpoint is free, requires no credits, and returns chain support flags for portfolio and transactions.

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 two compact sentences with the core purpose front-loaded. Every clause adds useful information: output fields, downstream use of the chain key, and the free/no-credit behavior.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description enumerates the important return fields, including the chain key and support flags. Combined with annotations and an empty input schema, it gives the agent everything needed to call this tool confidently.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so there is no input schema semantics to explain. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately avoids inventing parameter details.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List every chain Octav supports.' It also names the returned fields (key, name, chain id, support flags), so an agent can immediately distinguish this discovery tool from all portfolio, transaction, and bundle siblings.

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 gives clear usage context by explaining that the returned key is used by chain filters in other tools, and notes the call is free. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but no sibling appears to overlap with this purpose.

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