Skip to main content
Glama

prepare_solana_spl_send

DestructiveIdempotent

Build unsigned SPL token transfers, auto-creating associated token accounts and durable nonces. Discloses rent costs and blind-sign requirements for Ledger approval.

Instructions

Build an unsigned SPL token transfer DRAFT via Token.TransferChecked. Returns a compact preview + opaque handle — but does NOT yet serialize the message or fetch a blockhash. When the user says 'send', call preview_solana_send(handle) to pin a fresh blockhash, compute the Message Hash, and emit the CHECKS agent-task block, then call send_transaction. Run pair_ledger_solana first. Pass the base58 SPL mint address (canonical decimals resolved for USDC, USDT, JUP, BONK, JTO, mSOL, jitoSOL; otherwise read from chain). If the recipient does NOT yet have an Associated Token Account for this mint, the draft automatically includes a createAssociatedTokenAccount instruction — the sender pays ~0.00204 SOL rent, disclosed explicitly (rentLamports + description). AUTO NONCE SETUP: if the wallet has no durable-nonce account yet, this tool transparently bundles createAccountWithSeed + nonceInitialize ahead of the SPL transfer (legacy blockhash; subsequent SPL sends use the durable-nonce path). Surfaced as firstTimeNonceSetup: "true" + ~0.00144 SOL rent in the description. BLIND-SIGN REQUIRED: the Ledger Solana app does NOT auto clear-sign TransferChecked — its parser requires a signed 'Trusted Name' TLV descriptor that only Ledger Live supplies, so the device drops into blind-sign and shows a 'Message Hash' (base58(sha256(messageBytes))). The user must (1) enable 'Allow blind signing' in Solana app → Settings, and (2) match the Message Hash surfaced by preview_solana_send against the on-device value before approving.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
walletYesBase58 Solana mainnet address (ed25519 pubkey, 43 or 44 chars).
mintYesBase58 SPL mint address. Use the canonical mint for known tokens (e.g. USDC = EPjFWdd5AufqSSqeM2qN1xzybapC8G4wEGGkZwyTDt1v).
toYes
amountYesHuman-readable token amount. Decimals are resolved from the mint (canonical table for USDC/USDT/JUP/BONK/JTO/mSOL/jitoSOL; otherwise on-chain `getTokenSupply`). If the recipient does not yet have an associated token account for this mint, the tx automatically includes a `createAssociatedTokenAccount` instruction and the sender pays ~0.00204 SOL rent — disclosed in the preview.
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes far beyond annotations (destructiveHint, readOnlyHint) by detailing automatic ATA creation with rent cost disclosure, nonce setup, and blind-sign requirements. It explains the Ledger app behavior and user actions needed. No contradictions with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very verbose (400+ words) with multiple sections. While it front-loads the main purpose, it includes lengthy technical details about blind-sign that could be summarized. Conciseness is adequate but not optimal for quick scanning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (SPL send with ATA, nonce, Ledger blind-sign), the description covers the workflow, prerequisites, behavioral nuances, and user responsibilities. It lacks error handling details but is sufficiently complete for an agent to use the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema covers parameters with descriptions, but the description adds significant context: known token mints, resolution of decimals for amount, automatic ATA rent cost, and nonce setup. This adds meaning beyond the schema, especially for amounts and mint.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it builds an unsigned SPL token transfer draft via Token.TransferChecked, distinguishes it from native SOL sends and other Solana tools, and specifies what it does not do (serialize/fetch blockhash). The verb 'Build' and resource 'unsigned SPL token transfer DRAFT' are specific and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It provides a clear workflow: call this tool first, then preview_solana_send(handle), then send_transaction. It mentions prerequisite (pair_ledger_solana) and includes context on when to use (for SPL sends) and blind-sign requirements. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use or list alternatives.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/szhygulin/recon-crypto-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server