applyQuote

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the annotations: quote time limit, need to request a new quote after expiration, trading pair limits, and the Master UID requirement. However, it does not explain what side effect the destructiveHint=true annotation implies or whether an existing quote is invalidated.

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 well-organized with headings, bullet lists, and use cases. Every section adds value and the most critical information (return fields, rules, auth) is front-loaded, though the use case section is slightly redundant with the rest.

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, the description helpfully enumerates return fields and operational constraints. However, with zero parameter documentation, it leaves gaps around how to populate requestAmount correctly, which coin types are valid, and what the destructive side effect is.

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 needed to compensate. It does not explain any of the six parameters, the fiat/crypto enums, or the optional requestCoinType default. Only the indirect mention of 'quote amount' and 'trading pair limits' gives minimal semantic guidance for requestAmount.

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 ('Apply for a conversion quote') and lists the returned data (quoteTxId, exchange rate, expiration, amounts). It is clear about the resource and goal, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the many quote-related siblings such as getTradeQuote, QuoteApply, or createQuote.

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 concrete use cases (lock an exchange rate, show exact received amount, validate trade parameters) and important quote rules (30s expiry, re-request after expiry, amount limits). This gives clear context for when to use the tool, but it does not name alternatives or specify when not to use it.

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