Get block info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns specific details but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., what happens if block not found), rate limits, or authentication requirements. For a read-only tool, this is minimally acceptable but lacks depth.

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, well-structured sentence. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and the specific data it returns. Every word is meaningful; there is no redundancy or irrelevant information.

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 tool has 2 parameters, both required, and an output schema (not shown). The description mentions key return fields, which is helpful. For a simple block query tool, the description is nearly complete, though it could note that the output schema provides the full structure. Overall, it covers the essential context.

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 schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (block and chain). The tool description reinforces that block can be a number or hash, but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. Given full schema coverage, the baseline score is 3; the description does not significantly improve parameter understanding.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'details for a block by number or hash'. It lists specific fields returned (timestamp, miner, gas used, tx count), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, the set of siblings (e.g., get_block_number, get_address_info) are sufficiently distinct that confusion is minimal.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions using get_chains_list for chain discovery, which is a parameter hint, not a usage guideline. There is no statement about when not to use it or which tool to use for other scenarios (e.g., getting a block by number only).

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