Dritan MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the tool creates a wallet file and returns a path/address, but lacks critical behavioral details: whether this overwrites existing files, requires specific permissions, generates private keys securely, or has any side effects like network interactions.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It front-loads the core action and includes key details (method and output) without unnecessary elaboration.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that creates sensitive wallet files. It should explain more about the behavior (e.g., file creation, security implications) and output format, as the agent cannot infer these from structured data.

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 the schema already documents both parameters (name and walletDir). The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying 'name' is used in the filename, which is already covered. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('Create a local Solana wallet'), the method used ('using solana-keygen'), and the output ('return path + public address'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like wallet_get_address and wallet_get_balance by focusing on creation rather than retrieval.

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. While it's clear this creates wallets, there's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., solana-keygen installation), when to use local vs. other wallet types, or how it relates to sibling tools like swap_build that might involve wallets.

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