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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), and the description adds real context beyond them: fees, gas and slippage are excluded from the spread; pricing is 0.0050 USDC per call and always paid. It does not describe caching, freshness/latency of the on-chain quote, or staleness behavior, which would matter for an arbitrage signal.

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?

Front-loads scope, then usage routing, then cost. Every sentence earns its place, though the first sentence is densely packed with parenthetical caveats and the pricing clause could be trimmed.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description states what comes back (spot price, gross spread in bps, cheaper side) and what is excluded. Combined with the routing and cost disclosure, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 100% and the single 'pair' parameter already documents that only WETH/USDC is supported, so the description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the full load.

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?

States specific verb+resource (WETH/USDC spot price on Uniswap v3 and Aerodrome v2) plus the exact output shape (gross spread in bps, cheaper side). It explicitly narrows scope to 'DEX pricing/spread ONLY', making it plainly distinguishable from token-spot-price and multi-token-price.

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?

Names two alternatives and the conditions that select them: pool-slippage for expected slippage of a given trade size, market-snapshot if gas is also needed. That is explicit when-to-use routing with clear exclusions.

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