Track a Mayan swap

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

The description adds 'read-only' which aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). It also specifies the hash type (EVM or Solana), providing extra detail beyond annotations without contradiction.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and input, no extraneous information. Every sentence earns its place.

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 output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description sufficiently explains input and purpose. It is complete for a simple lookup tool.

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% and the schema already describes tx_hash in detail. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'look up' and resource 'status of a Mayan swap', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_quote or build_swap. The input method is also precise ('by its source-chain transaction hash').

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 when needing the status of a specific swap by transaction hash. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the sibling list provides context and the purpose is clear enough.

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