arcade_multiswap

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that inputs are raw token units, tokenOut accepts symbol or address, and that the tool returns calls to be executed sequentially (approvals then swap). However, it omits details on error handling, gas costs, or slippage.

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 very concise (3 sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence contributes essential information without redundancy.

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 complexity (multi-input swap), no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main flow and parameter details. However, it lacks a clear specification of the return value structure (e.g., format of each call), which would help an agent parse the output.

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 0%, so description adds value: explains that inputs amounts are in raw token units, tokenOut can be a symbol or address, and implies minTotalOut is optional. This goes beyond mere parameter names.

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 verb 'Build' and the resource 'basket-converge swap (Arcade aggregator)', specifying it converts many input tokens into one output token. This distinguishes it from siblings like arcade_swap (simple swap) and arcade_swap_finalize.

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 execution guidance ('Run the returned calls[] in order') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for multi-input to single-output swaps but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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