Get My Solana Address

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

The annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: it returns a base58-encoded address and clarifies the purpose is for receiving SOL or SPL tokens. It doesn't add unnecessary claims about side effects or rate limits, which is appropriate for such a simple read-only tool.

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-organized and front-loaded. It states the function, gives usage conditions, shows the return shape, and provides examples. Every sentence earns its place, and the examples are genuinely helpful without being redundant.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description is complete. It provides the return format, typical use cases, example invocations, and a clear distinction from the relevant sibling tool. An agent has everything needed to select and call it correctly.

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, so there is no parameter semantics to document. The description instead clarifies the output, which is the relevant semantic content. The baseline of 4 for a zero-parameter tool is appropriate.

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 starts with a clear verb and resource: 'Returns the user's Solana wallet address' for receiving SOL or SPL tokens. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool by explicitly directing portfolio-related needs to monei_get_solana_portfolio.

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 usage guidance is explicit: it lists concrete trigger phrases like "What's my Solana address?" and "Share my Solana wallet", and explicitly says when NOT to use it (when full portfolio details are needed). This leaves no ambiguity about when to invoke it.

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