get_code

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

The description aligns with the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive) but adds no behavioral context beyond that. It does not mention edge cases like addresses without code or the format of returned data. Since annotations are present, the bar is lower, but the description still adds minimal value.

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 front-loads the core action. It is exactly as long as needed and contains no filler.

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?

With no output schema and incomplete parameter documentation, the description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior. The block parameter is completely unexplained, and there is no indication of return values or edge cases. The purpose is clear, but the tool's full usage context is not.

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 two parameters (address and block) with no descriptions. The description mentions 'at an address' but says nothing about the block parameter, leaving its purpose and usage ambiguous. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate.

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 tool gets contract bytecode at a given address. The verb 'get' specifies the action, and 'contract bytecode' distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_balance or get_storage_at.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or comparison with sibling tools. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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