orbs_prepare_swap_intent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering side-effect safety. The description adds the return payload structure (required approvals, full quote, EIP-712 typed data) and the intent for external signing, which clarifies that the tool does not execute the swap or approvals.

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 entire description is a single, front-loaded sentence: 'Prepare a same-chain Orbs swap intent for external wallet signing. Returns required approvals, full quote, and EIP-712 typed data.' No filler or gratuitous detail.

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 preparation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, return values, and usage context. It does not mention workflow steps (like submitting approvals before the signed swap), but the readOnly annotations and the 'prepare' verb mitigate any ambiguity. A small gap in explicit post-conditions prevents a 5.

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 six parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds a key semantic constraint—'same-chain'—clarifying that fromToken and toToken must be on the same chain unless chainId overrides. It also indicates the inclusion of approval data in the output, which is not schema-explicit.

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 uses the specific verb 'prepare' and identifies the resource as a 'same-chain Orbs swap intent.' It lists the outputs (required approvals, full quote, EIP-712 typed data) and the context (external signing), making it distinct from execution tools like orbs_swap and other intent types such as orbs_prepare_twap_intent.

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 phrase 'for external wallet signing' supplies clear context: use this tool when the swap must be signed by an external wallet rather than executed directly. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are named, but the context is enough to guide tool selection.

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