spl-token_closeAccount

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions reclaiming rent but does not state that the account must have a zero token balance, that the owner must sign, or that the action is irreversible. Fails to provide critical behavioral context for a mutation operation.

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?

Very concise, single sentence with no fluff. However, it may be too terse at the expense of important details (see behavioral transparency). Still scores high for efficiency.

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 simple operation and 100% schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core action but omits prerequisites (zero balance), return value, and confirmation. No output schema present to compensate.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter. It does not clarify relationships or constraints (e.g., destination is optional, defaults to owner).

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: close a token account and reclaim rent SOL. It uses a specific verb ('close') and resource ('token account'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'transfer' or 'burn' which have different purposes.

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 (e.g., when a token account is no longer needed, or if it must have zero balance). No mention of prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer.

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