Blinks Confirm Action

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

The description claims 'operation class read' but annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, creating a contradiction. Beyond that, minimal behavioral context is provided (e.g., no mention of side effects, authorization needs, or post-confirmation steps).

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 concise with three sentences, and the first sentence clearly states the core purpose. However, it could be slightly more front-loaded by removing the less essential MCP context sentence.

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 presence of an output schema and complete input schema, the description is adequate for a simple confirmation tool. However, it does not explain workflow placement (e.g., must be called after signing) or handle potential errors.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, so parameters are already documented. The description adds no meaningful extra context beyond the schema's own descriptions. Baseline 3 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 clearly states the tool's function: confirming a completed Solana Action by sending the transaction signature back to the provider. The verb 'confirm' and resource 'completed Solana Action' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like blinks_executeAction or blinks_getAction.

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 mentions using the tool for 'Solana Actions and Blinks metadata fetch, validation, and POST action preparation' but does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool versus alternatives like blinks_executeAction or blinks_validateActionsJson. The guidance is vague and lacks exclusion criteria.

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