swap

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It mentions 'non-custodial' and 'built-in fee' but omits key behaviors like transaction signing, broadcasting, potential failures, gas implications, or finality. Unclear how the tool executes the swap.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no superfluous content. It front-loads the core function and key attributes, earning its place.

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 complexity (11 parameters, private key, transaction execution), the description lacks essential context. No mention of return value, transaction submission, or supported chains. Insufficient for safe invocation without additional documentation.

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%, setting baseline at 3. The description adds minor context (built-in fee, non-custodial) beyond the schema, but does not explain parameter semantics in depth or clarify optional parameters like fee_recipient.

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 swaps tokens via a DEX aggregator, distinct from siblings like 'send' or 'bridge'. It specifies the resource (tokens) and method (DEX aggregator), with added context on fees and custody.

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 for token swapping but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives or when not to use. No mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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