Quote a swap

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full burden. It discloses that the call proves liquidity, sizes minAmountOut, and reverts on no/thin pool. However, it does not state whether the call is read-only or has side effects, nor does it discuss authentication requirements. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and include critical behavior upfront. Every word adds value; no unnecessary information.

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 tool has no output schema, so the description should explain the return value (e.g., output amount). It fails to mention what the quote returns. Also lacks information about error messages or where to find pool info. Incomplete for a quoting tool.

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 schema already documents all parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as more detailed usage examples or constraints. Baseline score of 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 verb (quote), resource (swap via Uniswap v4 Quoter on Robinhood Chain), and specific constraints (exact-input, single-hop). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like execute_swap and rhc_info.

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?

Indicates it should be used to prove liquidity and size minAmountOut before executing a swap, implying it precedes execute_swap. It also warns about reversion on no/thin pools. Could explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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