solanaGetAsset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'get detailed information' but does not explain what is returned, whether the operation is read-only, any side effects, or rate limits. This is insufficient for a safe agent decision.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the action. However, it could be slightly more structured to separate the action from the parameter context.

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 no output schema, the description should hint at the structure of 'detailed information'. It does not. It also omits mention of required parameters (id) or error conditions. The description is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

The schema already describes both parameters ('network' and 'id') with 100% coverage. The description adds value by clarifying that the ID is a 'mint ID' and the asset types it can represent, which goes beyond the schema's 'base-58 encoded' description.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('detailed information about a Solana asset'), and the input ('by its mint ID'). It also specifies the asset types (token, NFT, compressed NFT), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like solanaGetAssetProof.

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?

The description implies when to use this tool (to get details of a single asset by mint ID) and naturally distinguishes it from siblings that return multiple assets or proofs. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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