near_get_block

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 states a generic read operation and does not disclose whether transactions are included, how errors are handled, or what the response contains, which is a significant gap even for a read tool.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, containing no wasted words. However, it is so minimal that it borders on under-specification, offering no useful context beyond a generic phrase.

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?

Despite the well-documented parameter, the description omits what 'block information' includes (header, transactions, etc.), lacks any output expectations, and does not explain how this tool relates to other block-related siblings. This makes it incomplete for an agent deciding whether to invoke it.

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 schema already provides full documentation for the single blockId parameter with type and description ('Block hash or height (omit for latest)'). The description adds no parameter-level information beyond this, so the baseline score 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 'Get block information' clearly states a specific verb and resource, and the tool name near_get_block identifies the Near blockchain. However, it doesn't distinguish this from generic block getters on other networks or sibling tools like get_latest_block/get_block_by_hash.

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, no mention of situations like fetching by hash versus height, and no exclusions. The optional blockId behavior is only implied by the schema, not explained in the description.

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