multi_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It explains that the tool 'Shows how many tokens you'd receive for a given ETH amount,' indicating a read-only quote operation, but it does not mention any limitations, data freshness, or whether quotes are binding. Core behavior is clear, but additional context would improve 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and result. It is concise, avoids unnecessary details, and every sentence contributes meaningful 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (two parameters, no output schema), the description adequately explains both what the tool does and what it returns. It does not detail the exact return structure, but the phrase 'Shows how many tokens you'd receive' across multiple tokens gives sufficient context for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage for both parameters, so the description adds minimal extra meaning. It does clarify that tokens are 'LaunchPad tokens' and that the quote is for a 'given ETH amount,' aligning with the schema, but this is not significant beyond what the schema already states. 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's function: 'Get buy quotes for multiple tokens at once.' It specifies both the verb and the resource, and the reference to 'multiple LaunchPad tokens' distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle watching launches, sniping buys, or checking safety.

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 a clear use case with 'Useful for comparing opportunities,' which implies when this tool should be used. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though the sibling tool names make the distinction evident.

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