calculate_tx_cost

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral context beyond the basic function. It does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only, what inputs are required, or how the cost is calculated when gasPriceGwei is omitted (though that detail is in the schema). The description is too sparse to cover the safety profile.

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 one concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action verb and object, making it easy to scan. Although brief, it effectively communicates the core purpose without wasted words.

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, no annotations, and a large sibling list, the description is too incomplete. It does not explain the output format, edge cases, or how this tool relates to similar gas estimation tools. The agent is left without enough context to reliably use the tool beyond what the schema already provides.

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%, so the parameters (network, gasLimit, gasPriceGwei) are each documented. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter context beyond the schema, but it does mention 'native tokens and USD' which hints at the output. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 calculates transaction cost in native tokens and USD, with a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like estimate_gas or get_gas_price, but the focus on cost in tokens and USD is distinct enough.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as estimate_gas or get_gas_prices_all_chains. The description does not provide use cases, exclusions, or comparisons, leaving the agent to infer applicability from the tool name alone.

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