Compare execution providers and total cost for a prospective swap and get a recommendation. Returns no signable transaction, so it cannot execute anything.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| taker | Yes | ||
| toChain | No | ||
| buyToken | Yes | ||
| fromChain | Yes | ||
| sellToken | Yes | ||
| sellAmount | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavior disclosure. It clearly states that the tool returns no signable transaction and cannot execute anything, which is a meaningful safety-relevant behavior. It stops short of fully describing return format or side effects, but the core non-execution trait is explicit.
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 tight sentences with the primary purpose front-loaded. The second sentence earns its place by flagging a critical non-execution behavior. No filler or redundant elaboration is present.
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 tool with six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what the recommendation contains, how providers are compared, or how parameters should be formatted, leaving significant gaps for correct invocation.
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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not define any of the six parameters. Parameter names like sellToken and fromChain are somewhat self-explanatory in context, but the description adds no detail about formats, units, or the meaning of optional fields such as toChain.
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 names a specific verb ('Compare'), resource ('execution providers and total cost'), and outcome ('get a recommendation'). The explicit statement that it 'cannot execute anything' clearly separates it from execution-oriented siblings, though it does not name alternative 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 implies use when evaluating a prospective swap, but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools like quote_crypto_swap or check_provider. There is no when-not-to-use guidance or alternative routing, leaving the agent to infer selection criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are clearly separated by domain and action: crypto swap tools vs. x402 paid resource tools. However, analyze_crypto_swap and quote_crypto_swap both compare providers and costs, so an agent could confuse their outputs despite the note about signable transactions.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using lowercase snake_case: analyze, check, find, purchase, quote. The naming makes each tool's intended action and target resource immediately clear.
Six tools is well-scoped for the server's dual purpose of crypto swap quoting and x402 paid resource discovery/purchase. Each tool serves a distinct step in the workflow with no obvious bloat.
The paid resource workflow is well covered with find, check, quote, and purchase. The crypto swap side covers analysis and quoting, though execution is intentionally external via wallet-signed transactions, and there is no explicit post-purchase or post-swap status tool.
