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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: that Solentic never sees the private key, the response is a runnable snippet, and generation must happen on the user/code side. This clarifies the tool's non-mutating, code-generation nature.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then provides necessary context about execution location and next steps. Slightly longer than the minimal viable but each sentence adds crucial information for correct use.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and simple behavior, the description is complete: it explains what is returned (runnable snippet), where to run it, and the immediate next steps. It covers the essential behavioral aspects beyond the annotations.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is vacuous at 100%. The description need not explain parameter details. It provides no parameter semantics, but with no params, the baseline of 4 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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Returns runnable code that creates a Solana keypair.' This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, none of which generate keypair code.

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 explains that Solentic cannot generate the keypair and that generation must happen external to the agent, providing clear context for when to use this tool. It also gives an explicit follow-up action (fund and call stake), though it doesn't state exclusions or alternative tools explicitly.

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