calculate_proposal_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Calculate', implying a pure computation, but does not explicitly state that it is safe, has no side effects, or is deterministic. This leaves the agent uncertain about whether it makes network calls or modifies state.

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, clearly worded sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and subject, making it easy to parse it quickly. Every word is meaningful.

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 no output schema and no annotations, and the description does not explain the return format, the algorithm (e.g., keccak256 of ABI-encoded data), or any edge cases. An agent cannot confidently use this tool without additional assumptions about the expected computation.

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 input schema provides complete descriptions for all four parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning about how the parameters are combined or any formatting requirements, but it does not need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 uses a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('proposal ID'), clearly indicating the input is 'proposal parameters'. This is distinct from sibling tools, which are mostly chain queries or transactions, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 or any alternatives. It simply states what it does without contextual clues such as 'Use this before submitting a proposal to get the ID'. There is no mention of exclusions or related tools.

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