get_btc_blocks_recent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, etc. The description adds 'READ-ONLY', mentions the cap at 200, and discloses behavior about indexer-specific fields (mempool.space). No contradictions.

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 dense but not verbose, front-loading the main purpose. Each sentence adds value, and it's well structured without 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?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers input behavior, output fields, and use cases comprehensively.

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 covers 100% of parameters. Description adds meaning by explaining the default (144), cap (200), and rationale for the cap ('bound HTTP fan-out on free-tier indexers').

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 it fetches recent Bitcoin block headers (newest-first) and enumerates the fields included. It distinguishes from siblings like get_btc_block_stats and get_btc_block_tip by specifying its purpose for chain-health questions.

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?

Explicitly provides example questions ('is the chain producing blocks at the expected rate?') and notes internal use by get_market_incident_status. Does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.

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