relay_get_quote

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explains the tool returns an executable quote and covers token/amount formats, but does not disclose side effects, auth needs, or safety (e.g., read-only nature is implied but not stated). The description adds context but falls short of full behavioral transparency.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear main sentence, followed by examples and bullet points. It is front-loaded and each part serves a purpose. Could be slightly more concise in the examples section, but overall efficient.

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 tool's complexity (cross-chain bridging, 8 parameters), the description covers purpose, format rules, examples, and trade types. It lacks details on what the quote includes (e.g., fees, slippage), but is otherwise complete for a quote retrieval 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing examples, clarifying token and amount formats in smallest units, and explaining tradeType enum values. This goes beyond the schema's property descriptions.

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 an executable quote for bridging or swapping tokens. It uses specific verb 'Get an executable quote' and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning cross-chain and same-chain scenarios, and references relay_get_currencies for token addresses.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: always use contract addresses, use relay_get_currencies to find addresses, and gives common examples. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives for different tasks.

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