kittenswapSwapTokens

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions 'automated routing and slippage protection' but fails to disclose destructive nature (sending tokens), necessary approvals, or failure modes like insufficient liquidity.

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?

Single sentence efficiently conveys the core purpose and key features. It is front-loaded but could be restructured to include key behavioral notes without adding length.

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 complexity of token swaps, the description omits critical information: return values, required user approvals, transaction signing, and potential side effects. No output schema or annotations to supplement.

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 description coverage is 100%, and each parameter is well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, resulting in baseline score.

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 specifies the verb 'Swap', resource 'tokens', and network 'Kittenswap DEX on Hyperliquid EVM'. It is distinct from sibling tools which involve other DeFi actions or token details.

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 states what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it vs alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusion cases. Context is clear but lacking explicit usage direction.

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