net_getVersion

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

No annotations provided. Description discloses error conditions (InternalError when Infura API unavailable), default behavior (defaults to mainnet), and return format (string). Lacks info on rate limits or idempotency, but is fairly transparent.

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?

Description is well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Errors). No unnecessary words, front-loaded with purpose. Earns its place.

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 2 parameters and no output schema, description explains return value (string with examples) and errors. Missing explanation of response_format parameter. Overall fairly complete but could cover response_format and differentiate from sibling tools.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds examples and default for the 'network' parameter but neglects to mention 'response_format' parameter or its enum values. Schema already documents both parameters, so description adds marginal value.

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?

Description clearly states it returns the current network ID and explains its purpose (identifying Ethereum network). Includes examples with mainnet and Sepolia, and mentions network IDs. No tautology.

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?

Description mentions it's useful for identifying which Ethereum network, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like eth_chainId or provide when-not-to-use guidance. However, it includes error handling context and examples.

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