Execute a live swap

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that this is a real, irreversible swap, subject to server-side caps on amount, slippage, and quote freshness, and that it can return a structured refusal. This exceeds typical transparency.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the critical 'REAL on-chain swap' warning. Every sentence adds essential information: prerequisites, caps, and disabled-state behavior. No wasted words.

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?

High-risk tool with no annotations or output schema. Description covers prerequisites, safety, caps, and disabled behavior, but does not specify what the success response looks like or how to retrieve swap status. Sibling get_swap_status exists, but the description doesn't point to it.

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 all 3 params (100%), baseline 3. Description adds meaning: quote must be unmodified and previously obtained, confirm:true is required, and server-side caps enforce quote freshness. It doesn't deeply explain quoteFetchedAt but the schema already does.

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?

Description clearly states the verb and resource: 'Executes a REAL on-chain swap' using a prior quote. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_jupiter_quote (which only fetches quotes) by emphasizing execution of an on-chain transaction.

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 states prerequisites: a quote from get_jupiter_quote or get_token_overview, confirm:true, and TRADING_ENABLED=true. It also notes that the tool is always listed but returns a structured refusal when trading is disabled, guiding appropriate use.

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