jupiter_getOrder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions returning a quote and unsigned transaction, but does not disclose any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only or has potential consequences. As a preparatory step for a swap, more behavioral context is needed.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the core action ('Get a quote + unsigned swap transaction') and adds a usage recommendation.

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?

The description explains what the tool returns (quote + unsigned transaction) but lacks detail on the structure of the return value, which is important given no output schema is provided. It also does not mention any prerequisites or constraints. Adequate but not thorough.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all parameters. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, but it contextualizes the parameters (e.g., they are used to generate a quote + unsigned transaction). Baseline 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?

The description explicitly states it returns both a quote and an unsigned swap transaction, and positions itself as the recommended entry point for swaps, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like jupiter_getQuote (quotes only) and jupiter_swap (full execution).

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 tool is described as 'the recommended entry-point for swaps,' providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives (e.g., just a quote or executing a swap directly).

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