Solana: solanaBalances

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral details beyond that. It does not explain which wallet is queried (since input schema has no parameters), leaving ambiguity about how the tool determines the target wallet. This is a significant gap.

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 a single sentence, highly concise and front-loaded. However, it sacrifices necessary information for brevity, leaving ambiguity about which wallet and what balances (native token vs SPL tokens).

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 simplicity (no params, no output schema), the description is partially complete. It identifies the chain and action but omits the wallet source and scope of balances. Annotations provide read-only safety, but without output schema, return format is unspecified. A slightly more detailed description would improve completeness.

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 zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to clarify. However, the description fails to explain that the wallet is inferred from context or how that works, negating any added value. Schema coverage is 100% but the description should compensate for the missing parameter context.

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 'Get wallet balances on Solana', specifying the verb (Get), resource (wallet balances), and network (Solana). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ethGetBalances or baseGetBalances, which target different blockchains.

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 implies use for querying Solana wallet balances but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the naming convention and sibling list make the context clear, so it's adequate but lacks explicit guidance.

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