get_transaction_count

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the semantic clarification that the count is the nonce, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits like changing values across calls or the effect of the optional block parameter.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It earns its place efficiently, fully fitting the tool's simple nature.

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 simple read-only tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It implies a numeric return value (nonce) and the annotations cover safety. The only notable gap is not explicitly explaining the optional block parameter, though the schema partially covers that.

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 coverage is 50%: the block parameter has a description ('Usually latest or pending'), but address lacks one. The description implies address is the target but adds no detail about the block parameter or the default behavior. It partially compensates but relies on the schema for block context.

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 'Get an address transaction count (nonce)' with a specific verb and resource. It defines the operation precisely and adds the nonce clarification, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_transaction or get_balance.

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 usage context is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It is a bare definition with no guidance on selecting this tool over siblings.

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