execute_swap

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing that this executes a financial transaction, spends funds, requires gas, and is irreversible. It only says 'Execute a token swap', which implies action but provides no explicit warning or operational 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 a single short sentence, but it adds almost no information beyond the tool name 'execute_swap'. It is under-specified rather than efficiently informative, so it does not earn its place.

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?

For a tool with 8 parameters, 5 required, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. It omits critical context such as network scope, the need for quotes/slippage checks, gas requirements, and the irreversible nature of the transaction, making it inadequate for an agent to use safely.

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 coverage is 100% with per-parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema already provides; it merely repeats the generic 'swap on DEX' context.

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 'Execute a token swap on a DEX' clearly identifies the action (execute) and resource (token swap on DEX), which distinguishes it from non-swap tools. However, it does not differentiate from chain-specific swap tools like solana_execute_swap or mention the EVM/network context, so it lacks full sibling differentiation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_swap_quote or get_best_route, nor does it mention prerequisites like token approval or quoting. There is no context for selecting this over other swap/bridge execution tools.

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