gas_prices

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool is read-only, returns estimates for low/medium/high priority, and supports currency conversion. It does not cover rate limits or error behavior, but for a simple read tool this is adequate.

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 at three sentences, front-loading the main purpose. It avoids redundancy and unnecessary detail. A slight improvement could be breaking into bullet points, but it remains highly readable.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers the input parameters, the return type (low, medium, high estimates), and optional currency conversion. It lacks details on unit or error handling, but for a straightforward gas price tool, it is reasonably 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all parameters. The description adds context by explaining the meaning of eventType options and the conversion purpose of quoteCurrency, but does not provide significant new information beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb ('get'), resource ('real-time gas estimates'), and context ('for different transaction speeds on a specific network'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on balances, transactions, or NFTs, as no other sibling provides gas price estimates.

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 lists required parameters (chainName, eventType) and explains their role, as well as the optional quoteCurrency. It provides enough context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. However, the sibling set does not overlap in functionality, making this less critical.

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