magicblock swapQuote

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

The description states the tool retrieves a quote (non-destructive), yet annotations set destructiveHint=true, creating a contradiction. No behavioral traits beyond quoting are disclosed, such as side effects or authorization needs. Annotations are contradicted, so score is 1.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with purpose, and includes a cost note. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 tool has low complexity and an output schema, so the description is adequate for core functionality. However, the annotation contradiction and lack of guidance on error handling or rate limits reduces completeness.

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 all parameters described. The description adds only the context of passing results to magicblock_swap and a price note, not additional semantic meaning. 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 clearly states the tool gets a swap quote between two SPL mints, names the underlying API (Triton Metis), and specifies how the result is used (passed to magicblock_swap). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like magicblock_swap which executes the swap.

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 tells the agent to pass the result into magicblock_swap, implying a workflow. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other quote tools) or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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