spraay_solana_jupiter_swap_tx

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

Discloses cost per call, which is useful beyond annotations. Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotency, but description does not elaborate on side effects or that it returns a transaction needing signing.

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?

One sentence plus cost note, very concise. But could add missing context without hurting conciseness.

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?

Lacks crucial context: this tool returns a transaction to be signed (implied by output schema but not explained), and relies on a quote from sibling tool. The description does not provide the full picture for correct usage.

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 descriptions are tautological; tool description only says 'provide typed arguments.' No guidance on how to obtain quoteResponse (e.g., from spraay_solana_jupiter_quote) or format of userPublicKey. Schema coverage high but meaning is nearly zero.

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?

Clearly states it's a Jupiter swap transaction, distinguishing it from quote tools and other swap tools by name and description. However, does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling like spraay_swap_execute.

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?

Implied usage for executing a swap on Jupiter, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., spraay_swap_execute) or prerequisites (e.g., a quote).

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