Get a Jupiter swap quote

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so effectively. It explicitly states read-only behavior, no execution, and that amounts are in the input mint's smallest unit, which are critical behavioral details.

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 three sentences, each adding essential value: purpose, safety/units, and relationship to execute_swap. It is front-loaded and free of extraneous 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 description covers purpose, safety, and integration with execute_swap, which is sufficient for a simple quote tool. However, without an output schema, it does not describe the quote object's structure, leaving a minor gap for an agent expecting to consume the result programmatically.

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's mention of units repeats schema content, adding no new semantic information. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 retrieves a live Jupiter swap quote, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling execute_swap by explicitly noting it is read-only and executes nothing.

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 description provides clear context for when to use the tool, noting it is a prerequisite for execute_swap and emphasizing no wallet is needed. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the relationship to execute_swap implies the appropriate usage.

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