getTransactionLogs

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is already disclosed. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations provide—no mention of return format, pagination, or block range semantics. It does not contradict annotations, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 at five words, but brevity here is under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. It fails to convey the tool's scope or behavior, so while it is compact, it does not earn a higher score for structure.

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 has no output schema, no usage context, and a large set of sibling log/block tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what 'logs from blocks' means, how blocks are specified (e.g., block height, range), or how it differs from getTransactionLogsForAddress. The complexity of the domain demands more context.

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 coverage is 50%: authToken is described, but chainName is only declared via a const value. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema. With 2 simple parameters and a const enum, baseline 3 is fair since the schema already defines chainName's constraint.

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 logs from blocks' is a vague noun-phrase restatement of the tool name. It does not specify what kind of logs, which blocks, what filtering or scope, or how it differs from sibling tools like getTransactionLogsForAddress, getTopicTransactionLogs, or getBlockTransactions.

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 vs alternatives. With 25 sibling tools including several log-related ones, the description offers no context on selecting this tool, no exclusions, and no mention of required parameters like chainName and authToken.

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