spraay_solana_jupiter_quote

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the cost of $0.005 USDC per call and reiterates 'Read-only'. It does not cover error handling, output format, or rate limits. While cost is a useful addition, other behavioral aspects are missing.

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 with three short sentences, front-loading the purpose. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness. No unnecessary 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 complexity of a swap quote tool and the existence of an output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain what a quote is for, how it works, or the meaning of fields like slippageBps. The output schema covers return shape, but the description still lacks context for an agent to understand the tool's role fully.

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 100%, but each parameter's description is merely the parameter name (e.g., 'amount parameter'), providing no real semantics. The description adds no further meaning about parameters (e.g., what units 'amount' expects, format of mint addresses). Thus, it fails to add value beyond the weak schema descriptions.

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 'Jupiter swap quote', identifying the tool's purpose. However, it lacks specifics on what the quote contains (e.g., expected output amount), which could be improved. It distinguishes from sibling spraay_solana_jupiter_swap_tx by indicating this is a quote, not a swap execution, but doesn't differentiate from other quote tools like spraay_swap_quote.

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 minimal usage guidance: 'Pass the listed fields directly as typed arguments.' It does not explain when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., spraay_swap_quote), nor does it mention prerequisites or contexts where it should not be used.

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