get_gas_prices_all_chains

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It indicates a read-only lookup via 'Get' and defines the scope across all supported chains, but it does not disclose response format, units, or potential data volume. The description is not misleading but is sparse on behavioral details.

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 avoids redundancy. Every word contributes meaning, clearly stating the action, resource, scope, and purpose without filler.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 params, no output schema), the description covers the core behavior adequately. It could add output details like units or a note on when to prefer single-chain alternatives, but for a basic cross-chain gas price lookup, it is largely 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 has zero parameters, making schema coverage trivially 100%. The description correctly implies no input is needed, and with no parameters to explain, the baseline of 4 applies.

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 the specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource ('gas prices') and scope ('across all supported chains'), explicitly stating the intended use case 'for comparison'. This distinguishes it from per-chain gas price tools like 'get_gas_price' or 'sui_get_gas_price'.

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 phrase 'for comparison' provides a clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide 'when not to use' guidance, such as for single-chain gas price queries, which would be a minor omission.

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