gas

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the 30s cache behavior and points to `meta.cacheAgeSeconds` for exact age, plus `meta.chainCount` for response composition. This goes beyond a bare 'get' statement, though it does not cover rate limits or exact return shape.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, but it repeats the chain list and fee-estimate concept twice within the first sentence, adding redundant filler. The metadata sentence is valuable, but the restatement could be removed without losing information.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides enough to call it successfully: the chains covered, the USD-per-speed-tier output, and cache metadata. It does not describe the full response structure, but the tool's simplicity makes the current description largely sufficient.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds useful context about response metadata (`meta.cacheAgeSeconds`, `meta.chainCount`) and the USD estimates, which compensates for the absence of any schema-level param explanations.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get real-time gas prices across 7 chains' and enumerates the exact networks. It also includes USD fee estimates, distinguishing it clearly from the historical 'gas_price_history' sibling via the 'real-time' qualifier.

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 conveys clear context: this is for current, real-time gas fees and notes a 30-second cache. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer it over the sibling 'gas_price_history' or mention any exclusion criteria, leaving the distinction implied.

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