SmallAssetQuote

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

Beyond the annotations (non-read-only, open-world, destructive), the description adds substantial operational context: required API permission, rate limit, supported wallet type, coin cap, custody exclusions, and the nuance that executed amounts may be less than available UTA balance. No statement contradicts the annotations.

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 main purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and followed by dense, scannable bullet constraints. Every bullet adds useful information and there is no filler.

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?

For a 3-required-param quote tool with no output schema, the description covers selection constraints, input limits, exclusions, and return content. Combined with the annotations, an agent has enough to call it correctly; the only implicit part is the follow-up after receiving the quote ID.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the burden of param meaning. It communicates that fromCoinList is the small-asset list capped at 20 coins, toCoin is the conversion target, and accountType is restricted to Unified wallet/eb_convert_uta. It does not map parameters by name or enumerate accepted accountType values, leaving a small gap.

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?

States a specific action ('Apply for batch conversion quote') on a specific resource ('small asset list') and names the return value (quote ID and per-coin details). It is distinguishable from execution siblings like SmallAssetConvert, but it does not explicitly name or contrast alternatives, so it stops short of a top score.

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?

Provides clear eligibility context: API key permission, rate limit, Unified wallet-only support, 20-coin maximum, and custody account exclusion. However, it does not point to alternative tools for other scenarios, so it lacks explicit sibling routing.

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