fee_quote

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the cost and required parameters, but does not detail other behaviors such as rate limits, idempotency, or error handling.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence with the core purpose and a cost note. No wasted words.

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 has 6 parameters (3 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects for a fee quote, though it could include more on the return format or failure modes.

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 50%. The description lists parameter names (inputs, outputs, target_blocks, input_type) but adds no meaningful detail beyond the schema. The optional preimage and macaroon parameters are not highlighted in the description.

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 'Exact fee quote for a planned tx' and enumerates key parameters (inputs, outputs, target_blocks, input_type), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_fees' or 'predict_fees' which offer different fee calculations.

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 implies usage for exact fee quotes and notes a cost ('15 sats per call'), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide when-not conditions.

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