eth_getGasPrice

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format (hex string), errors (InternalError), and default network. It does not mention idempotency, rate limits, or authentication, but for a simple read-only getter, the provided details are adequate and add value beyond the input schema.

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 highly concise and well-structured with clear sections for Args, Returns, Examples, and Errors. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 simplicity of the tool and lack of output schema, the description fully covers all needed context: input parameters, return value, error cases, and usage examples. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining both parameters (network and response_format) in plain language, provides defaults, and includes example usage. This goes beyond the schema's minimal descriptions, especially for the response_format parameter which is given 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 gets the current gas price in wei, specifically for legacy (non-EIP-1559) transactions. It distinguishes from siblings like eth_getFeeHistory, which likely handles EIP-1559, and the sibling list includes many eth_get* functions with different purposes.

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 implies usage for legacy transactions via the phrase 'for legacy (non-EIP-1559) transactions', providing context on when to use. However, it lacks explicit guidance on alternatives like eth_getFeeHistory for EIP-1559 or when not to use. The examples show how to call with different networks, which aids usage.

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