prepare_kamino_init_user

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

The description discloses many behavioral details (cost, durable nonce, blind-sign, refusal on repeat), but it contradicts the annotation idempotentHint=true. The description states it refuses if userMetadata already exists, which means repeating the call with the same wallet will fail, thus it is not idempotent. This contradiction forces a score of 1 per rubric.

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?

Description is four sentences, dense with information but not verbose. Key points are front-loaded (first-time setup, creates accounts, one-time). A minor improvement could be splitting the cost details to improve readability, but overall effective.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, costs, refusal condition, and security warnings (durable nonce, blind-sign). It does not explicitly state that the tool returns a transaction, but this is implied by the 'prepare' pattern and sibling tools. Minor gap but acceptable.

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 100%, but the description adds valuable context beyond the schema: it explains that the wallet funds specific accounts with rent estimates (~0.014 SOL, ~0.012 SOL, ~0.002 SOL) and requires an initialized durable-nonce account. This helps the agent understand the parameter's implications.

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 it is for first-time Kamino setup, creates specific accounts (user lookup table, userMetadata PDA, obligation PDA), and is a one-time prerequisite. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like prepare_kamino_supply by explicitly calling itself a prerequisite.

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?

Description explicitly says 'ONE-TIME — required prerequisite before prepare_kamino_supply / borrow / withdraw / repay' and 'Refuses if userMetadata already exists (use the supply tool directly).' It also warns about durable nonce requirement and blind-signing, providing clear when-to-use and when-to-avoid guidance.

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