quote_safe_swap

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

Declared read-only, which is critical for a preview tool. Describes return values (expected output, minOut with slippage buffer, fee breakdown). No annotations exist, so description bears full burden and meets it well, though rate limits or auth are not mentioned.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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 two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, inputs, and expected returns. Could mention that quotes may differ from execution due to price movement, but overall complete.

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 covers amount_in description; direction lacks schema description but the tool description clarifies enum values (buy/sell) and maps to token pairs (ETH→GBLIN or GBLIN→ETH). This compensates for the schema coverage 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?

The description clearly states it previews a buy or sell swap without executing, using specific verbs 'Preview' and resource 'swap'. It distinguishes from siblings that execute swaps (e.g., invest_usdc_to_gblin, swap_gblin_to_usdc_jit).

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?

Explicitly says 'without executing', indicating use before an actual swap. The context of sibling execution tools implies when to use this quote tool, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use.

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