get_maturity_end_block

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits on its own. It implies a read-only operation (getter) and specifies the NFT domain, but does not state potential outcomes such as errors for invalid token IDs, whether the result is a raw integer, or if any off-chain state is involved. It is adequate but lacks depth.

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 purpose. There is zero wasted wording, making it easy 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?

For a simple single-parameter getter, the description covers the essential purpose and expected output ('block number'). It lacks an output schema but the return type is intrinsically clear. However, it could benefit from mentioning related checks like is_under_maturity_period to provide fuller context within the toolset.

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 fully documents the sole parameter (tokenId) with a clear description: 'Token ID to get maturity end block for'. Since schema coverage is 100%, the tool description does not need to repeat parameter details. It adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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's function: 'Get the block number when the maturity period ends for a StarGate NFT'. It specifies a precise verb (get), resource (block number), and scope (StarGate NFT), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like is_under_maturity_period or get_token_level.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention related tools like is_under_maturity_period or suggest scenarios where this block number is needed (e.g., to compare against the current block). Without any usage context, the agent must infer applicability solely from the name.

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