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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It hints at potential cost with '$0.01' but fails to mention whether the operation is read-only, any rate limits, authentication requirements beyond api_key, or what the response looks like. The description is sparse on behavioral details.

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 one short sentence that front-loads the key action ('Get Jupiter swap quote') and includes important details. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could be slightly expanded for completeness.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain return values. It mentions 'best route, price impact, fees' but does not detail the structure, potential errors, or edge cases. For a tool that provides a quote, this is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the output.

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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds context that the tool returns 'best route, price impact, fees' which correlates to the parameters but doesn't provide additional meaning beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 'Get Jupiter swap quote' with specifics on what the tool provides (best route, price impact, fees) and that it works for any Solana token pair. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_price or get_arbitrage by focusing on swap quoting.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention conditions or prerequisites for use. It simply describes what the tool does without context for decision-making.

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