cpu_quote_mint

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and explicitly discloses 'It has no side effects — no transaction' and that it 'reads the live public drop.' This is transparent about the read-only nature. It could additionally describe edge cases (e.g., if drop is inactive), but the core behavior is well covered.

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?

Exactly two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and every phrase adds value. No filler words or redundant information; the description is tightly written and well-organized.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema). The description explicitly lists the return values (per-cell ETH price, total, drop window, per-wallet limit) and the use case (pre-mint sizing), making it complete for this request/response model. No annotations are needed because the description covers the safety profile.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description references `quantity` in context ('total for `quantity` cells') but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema's description already provides. It reinforces the usage without expanding semantics.

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 this tool previews a primary-market land mint without committing. It specifies the action (reads live OpenSea SeaDrop drop) and the exact outputs (per-cell ETH price, total, drop window, per-wallet limit), and distinguishes itself from cpu_mint_cell by naming it.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use it before cpu_mint_cell to size the buy and confirm the drop is active.' This gives direct guidance on when to use and identifies the alternative execution tool, effectively covering the usage context.

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