broker_quote_swap

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

Annotations do not cover quote vs. execution behavior, so the description adds valuable context by calling this a 'proforma quote' and requiring later confirmation. This prevents the agent from believing the swap is executed atomically. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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?

Three dense sentences, with the core action first, prerequisites second, and required follow-up last. The 'STEP 1' marker clearly sets expectations, and every sentence contributes value without 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 description covers the action, how to find input IDs, and the mandatory next step. The main gap is that it does not specify what the returned proforma quote contains or how to reference it in broker_confirm_quote, but the two-step workflow is still reasonably clear.

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%, so the params are already well documented. The description adds only procedural context ('Use wallet_get_pockets to find pocket IDs'), which slightly supplements the origin/destination parameters but is not needed to understand them.

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 a specific action ('Swap/exchange one cryptocurrency for another between pockets') and clarifies it 'Creates a proforma quote.' It clearly differentiates this from sibling buy/sell/confirm tools by describing the swap-between-pockets workflow.

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?

Directs the agent to 'Use wallet_get_pockets to find pocket IDs' and explicitly says it 'REQUIRES subseuent confirmation with broker_confirm_quote,' which frames the correct usage flow. It does not explicitly say when not to use it versus buy/sell, but the description's scope is clear enough.

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