prepare_marginfi_init

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description details cost (~0.01698 SOL rent + fee), that rent is paid from user wallet and reclaimable, durable nonce requirement, blind-sign on Ledger, and error condition for existing account. No contradiction 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.

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

The description is substantial but every sentence adds value. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. Could be slightly condensed, but it remains clear and well-structured without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, cost, error conditions, and after-effects. It implies the output is a transaction to be signed and sent. The context is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's role and dependencies.

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% with descriptions. The description adds semantic context: wallet is authority/fee_payer, PDA seeds are deterministic, accountIndex for multiple accounts. This reinforces schema but does not add entirely new information.

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 it is a one-time setup that builds a transaction to create a deterministic MarginfiAccount PDA under the user's wallet. It uses specific verbs ('build a tx that creates') and identifies the resource ('MarginfiAccount PDA'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'prepare_marginfi_supply' which depend on this init.

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 specifies when to use (one-time setup before other marginfi actions), prerequisites (durable nonce from 'prepare_solana_nonce_init'), and behavior if not met (errors with pointer). It also warns about Ledger blind-sign and cost, and states it refuses if PDA already exists.

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