get_quote

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must disclose behavioral details, and it does: amounts are in base units (µ), asset 0 = ALGO, and the two modes are exact-in or exact-out with minimum input solved. It stops short of stating side-effect freedom or error cases, but for a quote tool this is a solid disclosure.

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 only three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: scope, input modes, and output. It is front-loaded with the tool's main purpose and contains no filler or redundant information.

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?

With no output schema, the description adequately covers the return values (expected_out, route legs, quote_id) and the core usage modes. It doesn't explicitly state that exactly one of amount/amount_out is required, but the 'OR' and examples imply it. For a routing quote tool of moderate complexity, this is reasonably complete.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond schema by clarifying that amount and amount_out are alternative modes ('Give amount OR amount_out'), explaining base units, and linking the quote_id to build_swap. This exceeds the schema's per-field descriptions.

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 fetches a HOGSWAP swap quote across every Algorand DEX, with a specific verb ('get quote') and scope. It distinguishes itself from siblings like build_swap by mentioning it returns a quote_id for later swap execution, making its role unambiguous.

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 explains the two usage modes: exact input (amount) and exact output (amount_out), and notes that exact-out solves for minimum input. It connects to the downstream sibling build_swap via quote_id, providing clear context. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the mode selection and downstream linkage are strong guidance.

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