vechainstats_get_address_emissions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. The description only restates the tool's function ('Get carbon emissions') without mentioning whether it is read-only, what data is returned, any authentication/rate limits, or how the multiple optional parameters interact. This is a minimal disclosure with no added context beyond the tool name.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded with the action. It provides both function and context without any redundant text. The phrase 'perfect for VeBetter sustainability tracking!' is short and adds usage context, earning 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 no annotations and no output schema, the description must compensate by explaining the tool's behavior and parameter selection. It fails to clarify how the optional parameters relate (e.g., address vs txid vs blocknum) or what the response contains. For a tool with four optional parameters, this is insufficient guidance for an AI agent to invoke it 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all four parameters (txid, address, blocknum, timeframe). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning or usage guidance, so it does not elevate beyond the schema baseline. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 specific action: 'Get carbon emissions (CO2e) for an address'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vechainstats_get_transaction_emissions and vechainstats_get_network_emissions by specifying the address scope. The added use-case of 'VeBetter sustainability tracking' provides clear context.

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 when to use this tool: for address-based emissions, as opposed to transaction or network emissions. It also mentions a specific use case (VeBetter sustainability tracking). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusion criteria, but the address scope is clear from the first sentence.

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