gas_oracle

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

Description discloses live source (Base RPC) and unit (Gwei), and implies read-only behavior. However, no annotations provided and description does not cover potential limitations, rate limits, or error behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with return values. Every word adds value; no redundancy.

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?

Description fully explains return format (baseFee, maxPriorityFee, three suggestions in Gwei) and source (live Base RPC). Adequate for a simple oracle with no output schema.

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?

Input schema is empty (0 parameters), so schema description coverage is 100%. Description adds no parameter info, but none needed. Baseline score 4 for 0-parameter tool.

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?

Description explicitly states the tool returns Base gas fees (baseFee, maxPriorityFee) with three tiered suggestions in Gwei, derived live from Base RPC. It is distinct from sibling tools which cover unrelated domains like address intel, weather, etc.

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?

Implied usage context ('Built for agents that time or cost-estimate transactions') but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternative tools mentioned, though siblings are unrelated.

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