prepare_solana_nonce_close

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

The description provides detailed behavior beyond annotations: the two instructions (nonceAdvance and nonceWithdraw), self-protecting pattern, and post-condition. It aligns with annotations (destructiveHint=true) and adds useful context.

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?

Three concise sentences: first states purpose, second explains instructions, third warns about condition. Front-loaded with the core action. No wasted words.

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 tool without output schema, the description covers behavior, instructions, post-condition, and failure case. Annotations provide destructive hint. It is fully complete.

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 single parameter 'wallet' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The tool description adds no new information about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the action 'tear down a previously-initialized durable-nonce account' and the effect 'return its full balance to the main wallet'. It uses specific verbs and distinguishes from sibling tools like prepare_solana_nonce_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 explains when to use it (after init) and that it 'refuses if no nonce account exists'. It also warns that subsequent sends will refuse until init is run again. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use.

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