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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full weight. It only states that the tool returns a price and route, with no information about side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or behavior on errors. This is insufficient for a 15-parameter 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?

Two sentences, first states purpose, second adds a crucial constraint. No redundant information. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 15 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not explain the output format, error conditions, or how to interpret the route. Leaves too much to domain knowledge.

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 covers 60% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds the key constraint that sellAmount/buyAmount are mutually exclusive and one must be provided, but it does not elaborate on other optional parameters or their interplay. Overall, marginal added value beyond 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 it returns an indicative price and route for a swap on Fuse using 0x-style. It specifies the resource and action, and distinguishes from siblings like fuse_get_trade_quote by mentioning '0x-style response'. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other trade tools.

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 gives one usage constraint ('One of sellAmount/buyAmount must be provided') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like fuse_get_trade_quote or when not to use it.

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