get_block

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the burden and partially meets it by enumerating the returned fields (number, hash, parentHash, timestamp, miner, gasUsed, gasLimit, transactions). It does not state that this is a safe read-only call, what happens if the block is not found, or any network/auth constraints.

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 tight sentences, the lookup mechanism front-loaded and the return payload second. Every clause carries information, though the trailing field list is dense and unsorted by importance.

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?

With no output schema, spelling out the returned fields is genuinely useful and largely compensates. The gaps are error behavior for an unknown block and per-network differences, which are minor for a straightforward single-block read.

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 100% (number/hex/hash format, mainnet or kairos default, includeTransactions default false), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds only that includeTransactions switches between 'transactions count or list', a marginal clarification of an output-shaping flag.

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 and resource ('Get block by number or hash') and immediately scopes the lookup key. It distinguishes itself from neighbors like get_block_number, get_block_rewards, and get_transaction by focusing on a single block object, though it never names those alternatives.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of the sibling tools that could be confused with it (get_block_number for the latest height, get_block_rewards for rewards). The only implicit signal is that it fetches one block by identifier.

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