blinks_executeAction

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

Description discloses that the tool sends a wallet to an endpoint and receives a transaction to sign, indicating a write operation. However, it lacks detail on whether the transaction is auto-signed or returned for manual signing, and does not mention any side effects or permissions. With no annotations, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Single sentence that efficiently conveys the core action. No wasted words or redundant information. It is front-loaded with the primary verb.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the expected outcome (e.g., returns an unsigned transaction object), nor the role of the 'params' parameter in filling Action templates. Agent would benefit from more detail about the flow.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions (coverage 100%), so the description does not need to add much. It provides no additional meaning beyond the schema—e.g., 'params' are key-value pairs for template variables, which is already clear. Baseline score of 3 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 executes a Solana Action by sending a wallet to an endpoint and receiving a transaction to sign. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like blinks_buildActionUrl (which builds URLs) or blinks_confirmAction (which confirms).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., need an action URL from getAction) or when not to use. The description simply states what it does without context.

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