get_eip1559_fees

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool returns fee data, without mentioning that it is a read-only operation, which networks are supported, what the response format looks like, or any potential rate limits. The description adds little beyond the tool name.

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, front-loaded sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple read tool.

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 is simple with one parameter and no output schema, but the description lacks context about return values, supported networks, or when to choose this over overlapping siblings. Given the abundance of gas/fee tools, some additional context would improve completeness.

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 thorough coverage (100%) for the lone 'network' parameter, including examples, chain ID support, and default value. The description adds no parameter information, but the schema already documents the parameter well, so the 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 gets EIP-1559 fee data, naming base fee and priority fee as included components. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from related sibling tools like get_gas_prices_all_chains or get_gas_oracle, which may also provide fee information.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of supported networks, prerequisites, or scenarios where this tool is preferable to the many gas/fee-related sibling tools such as get_gas_price, get_gas_history, or calculate_tx_cost.

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