Quote a flash loan

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe, read-only operation that may fetch external data. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as what happens if the token or chain is unsupported, response format, or potential errors. It merely restates the tool's purpose.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately communicates the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with 'Fee quote' and contains no redundant or extraneous 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 the absence of an output schema and three required parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., a fee percentage, total cost, or estimated interest), nor does it mention that the tool queries external data (implied by openWorldHint). A complete description would include the return format or example output.

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 67% (chain lacks a description). The tool description does not add any parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides; it merely repeats 'token (symbol or address)' which is already in the token parameter's description. It fails to clarify the chain parameter's permissible values (though the enum covers that) or add constraints like decimal precision for amount.

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's function: providing a fee quote for flash-borrowing a specific token amount on a chain. The verb 'quote' is specific to the resource 'flash loan', and the mention of 'Fee quote' distinguishes it from sibling tools like flash_pools (which list pools) and faucet_mint (which mints tokens).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not mention that users might first use flash_pools to find available pools or that this tool is a prerequisite for executing a flash loan. There is no mention of when not to use it or what prerequisites are needed.

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