Get swap quote

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint) already convey safety and side-effect behavior. The description adds 'free indicative quote' and 'output amount includes Tollbooth's fee', which are meaningful behavioral details beyond the annotations. No 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 primary action and key context (free, indicative, fee included). Every part is useful, with no filler.

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 provides sufficient context for a quote tool: usage timing, fee inclusion, and decision support. It doesn't mention potential prerequisites like token resolution, but that is indirectly covered by schema and sibling tools.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for all 5 parameters (100% coverage), including chain enum, amount format, and slippage default. The description does not add parameter-specific guidance, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool gets a free indicative swap quote and explicitly distinguishes it from build_swap (execution). It also adds the specific detail that output includes Tollbooth's fee, making the purpose precise and unique among siblings.

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 explicitly directs the agent to 'Use before build_swap to decide whether to trade', providing clear when-to-use guidance and implicitly naming the alternative. This is helpful for tool selection and sequencing.

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