Jupiter Create D C A

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

Description adds 'Returns an unsigned transaction' beyond annotations. Annotations show readOnlyHint=false, not idempotent, openWorldHint=true. The description confirms it creates a new order (not read-only) and hints at non-idempotence. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences: first states core purpose, second adds workflow context. No wasted words. Front-loaded with key 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?

Given 10 parameters, output schema present, and annotations, the description is fairly complete. It clearly states the tool's purpose and return type (unsigned transaction), and provides integration context. Somewhat lacking in details about permissions or side effects, but overall sufficient.

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% with each parameter having a description. The tool description does not add parameter-level detail beyond the schema, which is adequate. Baseline of 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?

Description clearly states 'Create a Dollar-Cost Averaging (DCA) recurring order' and notes it returns an unsigned transaction. The verb 'create' and resource 'DCA recurring order' are specific, distinguishing it from other Jupiter tools like swap or limit orders.

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 explicit context: 'SAP MCP context: Jupiter protocol tools are served as AgentKit ecosystem tools. Use them for quote, route, and swap preparation, then use SAP transaction preview/sign/submit tools when an unsigned transaction must pass MCP signer policy.' This tells the agent when to use this tool and what follow-up steps are needed, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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