get_l2_gas

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the tool as comparing live fees and identifying the cheapest, implying a read-only data retrieval. No side effects are mentioned, but for a simple data tool this is sufficient.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core functionality, the second clarifies use cases. Every word earns its place.

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 no-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and usage. It could mention the return format, but the context is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter info because there are none. The schema coverage is 100% (empty), so no further compensation needed.

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 states the tool compares live L2 gas fees across four specified chains, identifies the cheapest, and is intended for 'cheapest L2' or 'L2 gas fees' questions. It uses a specific verb ('compare') and resource ('L2 gas fees') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_current_gas (likely L1) and estimate_transaction_cost.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: for 'cheapest L2' / 'L2 gas fees' questions. While it does not list exclusions, the context is clear enough given sibling tools cover other gas-related queries.

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