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

With no annotations, the description takes on the burden. It discloses that the result is a quote, not an execution guarantee, and not financial advice. It also mentions the freshness slot and price-impact thresholds, giving insight into output characteristics. No side effects are claimed, which is reasonable for a read-only quote.

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 information-dense but not excessive. It separates the main purpose, the disclaimer, and the required parameters. The repetition of 'Requires' is slightly redundant with the schema but does not harm readability.

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 quote tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers essential context: what it computes, the non-guarantee nature, and required inputs. It does not specify exact output structure, but that is expected of a quote tool and not a gap.

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 100%, so every parameter is well defined. The description reinforces that amount is in base units and explicitly shows the required parameter names in the 'Requires' clause, adding practical clarity 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 live aggregated Solana swap quote from Jupiter, enumerating key outputs (best-route, price impact, min-received, route path, USD value). It explicitly distinguishes a quote from execution, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides strong context on when to use it: it is a quoting tool, not an execution guarantee, and lists required parameters in a 'Requires' clause. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for comparison, but the 'NOT execution' warning effectively guides appropriate use.

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