get_chain_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, its side effects, or any potential delays. Although 'get' implies reading, the description does not explicitly state no side effects or destructive actions.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the action. However, it could be slightly more structured without increasing length, e.g., mentioning parameters briefly.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain what 'core metrics' includes or the return format. For a data-returning tool, this omission leaves the agent without necessary context to interpret the results.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention the 'chain' parameter or its enum values. It fails to add meaning beyond the schema, which itself lacks descriptions for the parameter. The description provides no additional semantic context.

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 'Get chain-level core metrics from website data (mainnet)' clearly states the action (get), resource (chain-level core metrics), and context (mainnet). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_protocol_metrics' by specifying 'chain-level' and 'mainnet', but does not explicitly differentiate from similar metrics 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The description simply states what the tool does without any usage advice.

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