Spl-token Burn

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

Description contradicts annotations: burning implies destruction, but destructiveHint=false. Additionally, no disclosure of irreversibility or need for authority. The 'operation class write' adds no new info beyond annotations.

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?

Description is somewhat wordy with irrelevant SAP MCP context and a list of operations. It could be more concise by focusing on the burn operation and its specific requirements.

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?

Missing critical context: irreversibility, authority delegation, requirement for the owner to have a token account, and the need for signing. Although output schema exists, the description should warn about the destructive nature.

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 covers all 3 parameters with brief descriptions. The description adds a generic warning about confirming values but no specific parameter-level details (e.g., amount in base units). Schema coverage is 100%, so 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 action ('Burn SPL tokens') and the resource ('owner's token account'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like spl-token_transfer or spl-token_freezeAccount, though the name 'burn' is specific.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lists multiple SPL operations but does not indicate when burning is appropriate or what prerequisites exist (e.g., owner must have token account).

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