simulate_swap

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

The description correctly implies the tool is non-destructive by calling it a simulation, and it lists outputs (expected output, price impact, gas estimate, simulation_id). However, it does not explicitly state side effects or prerequisites, which would be expected given no 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 description is two sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the primary function and immediately follows with critical usage instructions.

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 explains the purpose, usage guidance, and return values (expected output, price impact, gas estimate, simulation_id) adequately for a simulation tool. No output schema is present, but the description covers the essentials.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage with clear explanations for all parameters. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool simulates a token swap via Uniswap V3 and returns output, price impact, and gas estimate. It distinguishes itself from execute_swap by indicating it is a preliminary step.

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?

It explicitly states 'ALWAYS call this before execute_swap' and that the returned simulation_id must be passed to execute_swap. This provides clear when-to-use and linkage to a sibling tool.

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