Quote AETH to OSMO swap

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds value beyond them by stating it reads Osmosis's own estimate, moves nothing, and that the pool is small and moves with every trade. The freshness caveat is genuinely useful behavioral context.

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 the operation, then enumerates the return values, then the read-only nature, then the timing caveat. Dense but each clause carries information; the return-value enumeration is slightly list-like but not wasteful.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden and does so: it explains what the quote returns (OSMO after taker and pool fees, pre/post prices, combined fee and price-impact cost, and the chosen-slippage minOutput). Nothing needed to call or interpret it is missing.

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 both parameters are already documented, including units for amount and the minOutput/default/max for slippagePercent. The description restates the slippage-to-minOutput link without adding syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the 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?

States a specific verb (quote swapping) and resource (AETH for OSMO in the AETH/OSMO pool on Osmosis testnet), which unambiguously separates it from the read/query siblings. An agent knows exactly what operation this performs before opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear situational guidance: 'quote just before you swap' because the small pool moves with every trade. It does not name alternative tools or exclusions, but none of the siblings overlap this quote/pricing capability, so the context is sufficient in practice.

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