Sonar asset swap quote

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already covers the read-only safety profile. The description adds the 'short-lived' nature, implying the quote expires quickly, which is behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not elaborate on expiration behavior or other operational details like rate limits or authorization.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary purpose. It has no fluff, though it could be slightly clearer with less jargon, but efficiency is good.

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?

With no output schema and no schema descriptions, the description should cover what the tool returns, parameter constraints, and behaviors. It does not explain the return value format (e.g., price, output amount, fees) or mention the optional maximumToleranceBps parameter. The description leaves too many gaps for a quote tool.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only hints at asset IDs and an input amount ('exact-input') but does not explain amountInAtoms, maximumToleranceBps, or the meaning of the response. This is insufficient for 4 parameters with no schema descriptions.

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 states it requests a 'short-lived exact-input customer economics' between two asset IDs, which conveys the core function of obtaining a quote for swapping a specified input amount. It also distinguishes to some degree from sibling tools like strata_exact_output_quote by explicitly noting 'exact-input'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as strata_quote or strata_exact_output_quote. It does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or conditions under which this should be preferred.

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