polygon_health

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It conveys a read-only network status query and discloses pay-per-call pricing ($0.002 USDC), which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not describe the output shape, possible errors, rate limits, or any other behavioral traits beyond the returned fields.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose, lists the returned data, and includes cost information. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose, the data fields returned, and the cost. It is slightly incomplete because exact field-name strings for the subset parameter are not provided, but this is a minor gap for such a low-complexity 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the only parameter, but the schema only says 'Optional comma-separated subset of fields to return' without specifying valid field names. The description adds meaning by listing the four field categories available: chain id, latest block, gas price, and native token USD price, which helps an agent choose values for the fields parameter.

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 identifies the tool as a Polygon network health check and enumerates what it provides: chain id, latest block, gas price, and native token USD price. It lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'gets', but the resource and output fields are unambiguous. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like polygon_gas and polygon_block by being an aggregate health endpoint.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this aggregate health tool versus the sibling tools polygon_block, polygon_gas, polygon_token, and others. The description does not state exclusions, alternatives, or conditions, so an agent must infer usage from the field list alone.

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