helius_get_fee_for_message

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

No annotations provided, so description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action ('Get the fee') without explaining side effects (e.g., is it a read-only operation?), return format, or potential errors. The description does not add behavioral context beyond the action.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it is terse, which sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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?

No output schema and no annotations. The description does not explain what the fee represents (e.g., transaction fee in lamports), error handling, or any prerequisites. For a fee retrieval tool, the description is incomplete for an agent to fully understand its behavior.

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 50% (only `message` has a description). The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'serialized message' for the message parameter, and does not explain the `commitment` parameter (enum values unelaborated). With low coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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?

Description clearly states the tool gets a fee for a serialized message, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'helius_get_balance' and transaction-related tools, but could be more specific about the type of fee (e.g., transaction fee vs compute units).

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 like 'helius_get_priority_fee_estimate' or other getters. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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