Estimate Buy Resource

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real value by stating no session is required and that backend rate limits apply — neither is derivable from the annotations. It also names the exact response fields and how they map onto create_order parameters, though it omits latency/rate-limit magnitude.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then the return shape, then defaults, then routing — a sensible order with no filler sentences. Slight redundancy in enumerating return fields that the output schema already defines, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

For a 7-parameter read-only estimation tool with an output schema and full schema coverage, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing: purpose, defaults, safety profile, rate-limit caveat, output mapping, and sibling routing are all present.

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 baseline is 3; the description earns a bump by restating the operational defaults (ENERGY, 100000 units / 1000 for BANDWIDTH, 900 s) in one place and clarifying that returned quote fields correspond to specific create_order inputs, which frames why those parameters matter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (quote price and availability for ENERGY/BANDWIDTH) plus the precondition 'for a receiver address before placing an order'. This distinguishes it cleanly from tronsave_create_order, tronsave_list_order_books, and tronsave_get_min_price without requiring schema inspection.

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 positions the tool as a pre-order quote step, and routes two adjacent needs to named siblings: 'For order-book depth use tronsave_list_order_books; for the minimum unit price only use tronsave_get_min_price.' Both when-to-use and alternative selection are covered.

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