get_swap_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds 'exact-input' and 'o1 Base', but omits whether the operation is read-only, whether it consumes gas, whether quotes expire, or any auth/permission requirements.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficiently sized, though the extreme brevity leaves no room to cover essential context for a four-parameter tool.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description should do much more. It fails to explain parameter semantics or indicate what the quote returns, leaving the agent under-informed for 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% for four required parameters. The description loosely maps 'buy or sell' to side and 'exact-input' to amount_in_raw, but never explains token_address, amount_in_raw's raw-unit format, or slippage_bps units.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get' a 'quote' for an 'exact-input o1 Base buy or sell'. This is clear and distinguishes the tool from generic siblings, though it does not explicitly name or contrast with prepare_buy_token or prepare_sell_token.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance. It does not say whether this is a read-only preview to call before prepare_buy_token/prepare_sell_token, whether it requires a connected wallet, or what conditions select it over other quote-related siblings.

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