Estimate the price impact of a token swap on KAYEN to avoid slippage. Provide the pool address, token, and amount.
Calculate price impact for a swap on KAYEN
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tokenIn | Yes | Input token symbol or address | |
| amountIn | Yes | Amount to swap | |
| poolAddress | Yes | Liquidity pool address |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions no side effects, but as a read calculation, it's implied safe. However, no details on input validation, error conditions, or computational aspects are given.
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?
Single sentence, concise, and front-loaded with the core purpose. No unnecessary information.
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 output schema and no annotations, the description is minimal. It tells what the tool does but not what it returns (e.g., price impact percentage, slippage) or any caveats. For a calculation tool, more context about output would help, but the schema covers parameters adequately.
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 100%, so parameter meanings are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional semantic details about the parameters, which is acceptable given the high coverage.
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?
States a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('price impact for a swap on KAYEN'). It's clear what the tool does, though it doesn't differentiate from siblings like find_best_swap_route or detect_arbitrage, which also relate to swaps and pricing.
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?
No guidance on when or why to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites like the pool needing to exist or sufficient liquidity, nor does it contrast with swap_tokens or find_best_swap_route.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.