Standard Tools: getChangeNowSwapQuote

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds that it is for cross-chain exchange and that tickers must be supported. It does not contradict annotations, but fails to disclose potential behavioral aspects like rate limits or output risk. Given annotations coverage, this is minimally adequate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. It is concise with no wasted words. However, it could be slightly more informative (e.g., hinting at the output structure) without becoming verbose, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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 no output schema, the description should explain what the quote contains (e.g., estimated rate, fees, expiration). It only mentions the constraint on tickers. For a quote tool, the agent needs to know the return format. The description is incomplete for effective 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?

The input schema already has 100% coverage with clear parameter descriptions (fromTicker, toTicker, fromAmount). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it provides no extra value. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get a swap quote for cross-chain exchange.' It specifies the verb 'Get', the resource 'swap quote', and the domain 'cross-chain exchange via ChangeNow.' This distinguishes it from sibling swap tools that may be on different protocols or single-chain.

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 implies usage by stating 'Tickers must be supported by ChangeNow,' suggesting use only for ChangeNow-supported pairs. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like baseSwapQuote or ethSwapQuote, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance. Usage is implied but not fully clarified.

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