debugTraceBlockByNumber

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the trace is read-only or modifies state, what side effects occur, or any authentication or rate limit concerns. The term 'replay' could imply execution, which needs clarification.

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. It is efficient but could benefit from a bit more detail without being overly long. However, it is not verbose and gets the core idea across.

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 complexity of block tracing and the presence of 3 parameters with nested objects, the description is insufficient. It does not describe the output format, explain how tracer works, or clarify the distinction from similar sibling tools like traceReplayBlockTransactions.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema. For parameters like 'tracer', the schema says 'Tracer options' but the description does not explain what tracers are available or their purpose.

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 'Replay and trace all transactions in a block identified by its number' clearly states the action (replay and trace) and the resource (all transactions in a block by number). It distinguishes from sibling tools like debugTraceBlockByHash which uses block hash instead of number.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or suggestions for other tools like debugTraceBlockByHash or traceBlock.

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