bags_get_trade_quote

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Free read-only tier,' indicating no cost and no side effects, which is the most important behavioral trait for a quote tool. It does not cover every nuance like quote expiry or liquidity reservation, but the key read-only behavior is transparent.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by the free read-only note and the mint details. The only minor redundancy is repeating default mint addresses also present in the schema, but the overall structure is efficient.

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 simple quote tool with fully covered parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough context for an agent to know what to invoke and why. The main gap is that authentication requirements are not explicitly addressed, despite a sibling bags_authenticate tool, though 'free read-only tier' hints at low-friction access.

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 baseline is 3. The description repeats the default SOL and BOS mint addresses already present in the schema, adding no substantial new parameter semantics beyond what is already documented.

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'), a clear resource ('a swap quote'), and a precise scope ('trade SOL and any Bags ecosystem token'). It naturally distinguishes itself from the sibling bags_execute_trade by focusing on quotes instead of execution.

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 phrase 'Get a swap quote' and the explicit 'Free read-only tier' establish clear context for when this tool is appropriate: for obtaining quotes without executing trades. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use this before executing,' but the intended context is clear.

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