GET_NEAR_SWAP_SIMPLE_QUOTE

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the dry-run nature and that no addresses are required, but does not mention any behavioral aspects like rate limits, authentication, or error conditions. It is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 front-loads the purpose and provides structured steps. However, it is slightly verbose with a step number and notes; could be more concise without losing clarity.

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 and lack of output schema, the description covers purpose, usage hints, and parameter clarifications. It does not explain the return value, but that is acceptable for a simple quote 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description restates parameter examples (e.g., originAsset format) and defaults (slippage, wait time) but adds little new meaning beyond the schema. The note about token discovery is helpful context but not parameter-specific.

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 retrieves a simple NEAR intent swap quote as a dry run without needing addresses. It differentiates from siblings by specifying 'simple quote' vs full quote and directing token name discovery to GET_NEAR_SWAP_TOKENS.

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 says to use this when users want to explore swap options without recipient addresses and includes a note to use GET_NEAR_SWAP_TOKENS for simple token names. However, it does not mention when to prefer a full quote or execution over this simple quote.

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