dex_get_swap_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It only states 'calculates expected output amount', which implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly confirm that the tool does not execute the swap, nor does it disclose any error conditions, fee handling, or whether the quote is simulated without on-chain effects.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, and the parenthetical adds the key output meaning. Every word earns its place with no fluff or repetition.

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 4 required parameters and no output schema or annotations. The description explains the purpose and the primary return (expected output amount), but it does not detail the output structure, potential additional quote fields (e.g., price impact, route), or prerequisites. It is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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 descriptive parameter definitions (e.g., 'Input token symbol or address', 'Amount to swap (decimal string)'). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'a quote for token swap on a VeChain DEX', with a clarifying parenthetical 'calculates expected output amount'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like dex_execute_swap (executes swaps) and dex_calculate_slippage (calculates slippage).

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 implies the tool is used to obtain a quote before executing a swap, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., dex_execute_swap) or mention any exclusions. There is no 'use this instead of X' guidance.

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