solana_get_swap_quote

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states the purpose and does not reveal that it is a read-only query, any potential external call latency, return format, or whether it requires prior setup. This leaves the agent with a significant gap.

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 focused sentence that front-loads the core purpose. There is no wasted text or redundant detail.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too sparse. An agent would not know what the quote contains, whether it is safe to call, or how it connects with related tools like 'solana_execute_swap'. More behavioral and contextual detail is needed.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the schema already explains amount, mints, and slippage clearly.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('best swap quote'), and provider ('Jupiter DEX aggregator'). This distinguishes it from other swap-related tools like 'get_swap_quote' or 'execute_swap' by scoping to Solana+Jupiter.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as the generic 'get_swap_quote' or the related 'solana_execute_swap'. The name imples Solana context, but there is no explicit reasoning or exclusions.

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