solana_forensics_get_schema

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states that it returns parameter requirements, types, and descriptions, and uses 'Get' which implies read-only behavior. However, it doesn't explicitly declare side-effect-free status, error handling, or prerequisites beyond knowing the operation identifier.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, an Args section with a clear parameter explanation, and a return summary. Every sentence provides value with no redundancy.

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?

For a simple one-parameter introspection tool, the description is mostly complete. It covers the operation format and return value, and since an output schema exists, return details don't need to be over-explained. A minor gap is not mentioning that discover can list valid operations, but this is an acceptable omission given sibling context.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage for the 'operation' parameter, but the description compensates by giving the format 'category.action' with concrete examples. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema, though it could further mention where to discover valid operations.

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 'Get detailed parameter schema for a specific operation' with a specific verb and resource. It provides the operation format and examples, distinguishing it from sibling tools like execute and discover.

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 the tool is for when you need the parameter schema of a specific operation, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention exclusions. No reference to sibling tools like discover for enumeration or execute for running operations.

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