get_supported_chains

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

The description indicates a read-only operation with no side effects. However, it does not disclose potential behavior like network caching, rate limits, or return format details, which is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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, concise sentence that fully conveys the tool's purpose without unnecessary words or structure. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple, parameterless tool. While it does not specify the exact output format (e.g., list of chain names vs. objects), the purpose is clear and likely sufficient for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool.

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?

With zero parameters, the description adds all necessary meaning beyond the empty schema. It clarifies that the tool returns a list of supported blockchain networks, which is sufficient for invocation.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource 'all blockchain networks supported by deBridge for cross-chain swaps'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like create_tx and search_tokens, which serve different purposes.

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 implies the tool should be used when needing a list of supported chains for cross-chain swaps. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the sibling tools are functionally distinct, reducing ambiguity.

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