find_best_swap_route

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about whether this is a read-only quote versus an executable operation, auth/allowance requirements, rate limits, or freshness of the quoted route. 'Optimal' is asserted without explaining the optimization criteria.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It is arguably under-specified rather than verbose, but as a conciseness measure it is efficient.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must convey return shape and safety profile; it does neither. An agent cannot tell what a 'route' response contains (hops, pools, expected output, price impact) or whether calling it has side effects, leaving a meaningful gap for a swap-routing tool.

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 all three parameters (tokenIn, amountIn, tokenOut) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning such as amount format/decimals, address-vs-symbol handling, or slippage expectations, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Find optimal swap route') and resource, and names the protocol (KAYEN). However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling swap_tokens or from route-analysis tools like calculate_price_impact and detect_arbitrage, so an agent must infer that this is a routing/quote lookup rather than a swap execution.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus swap_tokens or the many price/analytics siblings. No prerequisites, no ordering hints (e.g., 'call before executing a swap'), and no exclusions.

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