Calculate swap estimates on Steelswap DEX for any token pair. Input token, amount, and output token to receive an instant quote before executing trades.
Get a swap estimate from Steelswap DEX
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tokenIn | Yes | Input token identifier | |
| amountIn | Yes | Amount of input token | |
| tokenOut | Yes | Output token identifier |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.14Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full disclosure burden. While 'estimate' implies a read-only simulation, the description doesn't confirm this, nor does it disclose what the estimate includes (price, slippage, fees), latency characteristics, or rate limiting concerns.
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?
Extremely concise single sentence with no redundant words. However, it lacks the richness expected for a financial calculation tool—one additional sentence explaining the return value or behavior would improve utility without sacrificing 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?
For a 3-parameter DEX tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to describe the return value format (what constitutes the 'estimate'), safety profile, or how to interpret results, leaving critical gaps in the agent's understanding.
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?
Input schema has 100% description coverage ('Input token identifier', 'Output token identifier', 'Amount of input token'), so the description doesn't need to compensate. The description adds no parameter-specific context, meeting the baseline for high-coverage schemas.
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 the core action (get swap estimate) and specific domain (Steelswap DEX), distinguishing it from sibling get_steelswap_tokens. However, it doesn't specify what the estimate represents (e.g., expected output amount, price impact, or gas costs), leaving some ambiguity despite the contextual clues from parameter names.
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?
Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites (such as validating token pairs exist), or post-conditions. The agent must infer appropriate usage solely from the parameter schema.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.