debank_get_gas_prices_tool

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

No annotations exist, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states this is a read operation ('get') and describes return data (gas price tiers). However, it lacks details like real-time freshness, caching, or authorization requirements, which would improve transparency.

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 concise, using a few sentences to state purpose, usage, arguments, and returns. It is front-loaded with the main action and well-structured with clear sections for args and returns.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter meaning, and return structure. Minor gaps include unspecified 'common transaction types' and exact format of chain_id, but overall it is fairly complete.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the single parameter 'chain_id'. The description adds only 'Blockchain ID (required)', which is minimal improvement over the schema's type declaration. It does not provide examples, format hints, or possible values.

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 current gas prices for a blockchain from DeBank, with a specific verb ('get') and resource ('gas prices'). It is distinct from sibling tools, which focus on user-specific data, pools, or chains.

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 explicitly mentions monitoring gas prices for optimizing transaction costs, providing clear context for when to use. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, but no sibling tool offers similar functionality, so no confusion arises.

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