Indexer: Historic total VET staked

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world. The description adds that it returns a 'running-total time series' and provides the endpoint, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination or rate limits. Annotations carry the burden here, so the description adds modest value.

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 two sentences, front-loads the core purpose, and includes the endpoint. Every word is necessary; no redundancy or fluff.

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 moderate complexity (historic time series, optional filter), the presence of an output schema, and full annotation coverage, the description is sufficiently complete. It clearly states what the tool does and provides the endpoint, which is enough for an AI agent to understand its usage.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (range and level), with full enum values explained. The description only adds that the filter is optional, which is already implied by the schema's optional property flag. No additional semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 the tool returns a 'running-total time series of total VET staked in Stargate' and mentions the optional filter by NFT level. It distinguishes from sibling tools like getStargateTotalVetStaked (non-historic) and other historic Stargate tools by specifying the metric and endpoint.

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 description implies usage for retrieving historic total VET staked with optional NFT level filtering but does not explicitly state when to avoid using it or mention alternatives. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or comparative guidance.

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