Preview Transaction

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

Annotations already indicate non-destructive (destructiveHint=false) and not read-only (readOnlyHint=false). Description adds that it's a required preflight step, but doesn't detail what the preview entails (e.g., decoding, validation).

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?

Two sentences, no filler. First sentence states purpose, second gives usage guideline. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are covered. Description is complete for a preview tool given the annotations and sibling context, though a bit more detail on what information is returned would be helpful.

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 describes the parameters (encoding and transaction). Description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what's in the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool previews a Solana transaction before signing or submission. The specific verb 'preview' and resource 'Solana transaction' are provided, and it distinguishes from siblings by noting this is a required preflight step.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (before signing/submission) and what not to do (avoid local signing scripts or reading keypair files). Context suggests it's a prerequisite for sap_sign_transaction, but no direct alternative mention.

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