getBeaconStateFork

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 behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic function, omitting details such as return format, error conditions, authentication needs, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool interacting with blockchain state.

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, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information, 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?

Given the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide more context about return values, typical usage, or how it fits with sibling tools. The minimal description leaves significant gaps, especially with many similar beacon state tools available.

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%, with both parameters adequately described in the input schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it simply restates the tool's purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already explains parameters well.

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 retrieves 'fork version information for a given Beacon Chain state'. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('fork version information'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like getBeaconStateCommittees or getBeaconStateFinalityCheckpoints.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no context about typical use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it. An agent would not know how to choose among the many beacon state tools.

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