gas_price_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses DB-backed storage, a 5-minute cache, 365-day retention with monthly archival, and exactly which metrics are returned per row. Minor gaps like response ordering or timezone are not disclosed, but the core behavior is well covered.

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 two sentences and front-loads the action and scope. The em-dash summary and the subsequent row list partially duplicate the network/metric enumeration, but the overall structure is efficient and scannable.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the returned row structure, units, time range, data source, and caching behavior. It does not specify ordering or timezone, but those are minor omissions given the level of detail provided.

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 sole parameter `days` is already fully described in the schema with default, minimum, and maximum values. The description only repeats the 90-day cap without adding new format, syntax, or edge-case meaning, so it adds no value beyond the schema.

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 ('Get') and resource ('daily gas price history'), names the exact networks and metrics, and caps the range at 90 days. This makes it clearly distinguishable from live gas or other history tools.

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?

It explicitly positions the tool as useful for tracking gas fee trends and identifying high/low gas periods. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended context is clear enough for an agent to choose it over live or current-price tools.

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