Query Chain Tip

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety and idempotency profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only that it reports sync progress, which is useful but not deep behavioral context. It does not describe freshness or caching behavior, so a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that names the resource and its returned fields with zero waste.

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 zero-parameter, annotated, read-only query with no output schema, the description covers what is needed to call it correctly. Ideally it would note the return shape slightly more (since there is no output schema) or mention frequent polling, but it is essentially complete.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to document; the baseline for a no-param tool is 4. The description correctly adds no parameter noise.

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?

States a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('current tip of the blockchain') and enumerates the returned fields (slot, block number, epoch, sync progress). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling query tools like cardano_query_utxo or cardano_query_leadership_schedule.

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?

Usage is implied by 'current tip' — the agent can infer this is for chain-head status. However, no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives are named, so it is only the minimum viable level.

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