blinks_buildActionUrl

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core function without revealing whether the operation is read-only, requires permissions, or has side effects. The term 'build' implies creation but lacks clarity on mutability.

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, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word earns its place.

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 moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description is sufficient for a basic understanding. However, it omits details like the format of the output URL or the behavior of wrapping, which would aid 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?

Schema descriptions already cover all three parameters with 100% coverage. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond repeating that parameters can be template variables or optional providers. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as it does not significantly enhance understanding.

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 verb ('Build and optionally wrap'), the resource ('Solana Action URL'), and the context ('sharing as a Blink'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like blinks_getAction which retrieves action metadata, and blinks_validateActionsJson which validates.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as blinks_getAction or blinks_confirmAction. It does not specify prerequisites or when wrapping is appropriate, leaving the agent without decision context.

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