sideswap_server_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states what data is returned (fees, amounts, balances) but does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, error handling, or authentication needs. The term 'Fetch' implies read, but more clarity on non-destructive nature would improve transparency.

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 consists of two concise sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance. Every word serves a purpose, with no redundancy or irrelevant 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 optional parameter, no output schema), the description provides sufficient information: what it fetches and when to use it. However, it could be more complete by mentioning that the call is safe and can be repeated, or by noting potential error states (e.g., server timeout).

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 0% and the description does not mention the 'network' parameter. Although the parameter is simple (enum of mainnet/testnet), the description fails to add any value beyond the schema. For a tool with no schema descriptions, the description should explain the parameter's purpose and effect.

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 verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'SideSwap server status', listing specific data types (live fees, minimum amounts, hot-wallet balances). It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on server status, which is a prerequisite for other swap/peg operations.

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 explicitly instructs to call this BEFORE recommending a peg or swap to ensure values reflect current state. This provides clear when-to-use guidance, though it omits explicit alternatives or exclusions.

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