solana-tx-explainer

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

No annotations provided, so description handles transparency. Discloses public RPC usage, no auth required, and cost per call. Does not mention rate limits or error handling, but for a read-only explainer it is sufficient.

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 and outputs, second describes backend and cost, no redundant words. Front-loaded with key information.

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?

No output schema, but description enumerates return fields (fee payer, programs, token changes, fee, block time, summary). Covers expected outputs adequately for a simple tool.

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 has 1 parameter with description. Description adds no additional detail beyond the schema's description of the signature format. Schema coverage is 100%, so 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?

Clearly states it decodes a Solana transaction signature into a structured breakdown (fee payer, programs invoked, token balances, etc.). Explicitly names the resource (Solana transaction) and the action (explain/decoded). Distinct from sibling tools like 'tx-explainer' by specifying Solana network.

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?

Provides clear context: uses public Solana mainnet RPC, no API key needed, and cost ($0.07/call). Implies usage when needing transaction details. No explicit exclusions or alternatives, but specificity suffices.

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