metaplex-nft_configureRoyalties

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

Without annotations, the description must convey all behavioral traits. It indicates a mutation ('configure') but does not disclose potential side effects, reversibility, permission requirements, or response details. This lack of transparency risks misuse.

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 concise sentence with no waste. However, it could be more informative without sacrificing brevity.

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 mutation tool with four required parameters and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks context about ownership, authority, on-chain impact, and return values, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no new semantic meaning beyond restating 'royalty fee and creator splits'. 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 explicitly states the tool configures royalty fee and creator splits for an NFT, using the precise verb 'configure' and specifying the resource. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like updateMetadata or delegateAuthority.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., being the update authority) or scenarios where other Metaplex tools are more appropriate.

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