lock

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

Discloses irrevocability until unlock date, Streamflow's fee structure (0.09-0.16 SOL plus 0.19-0.5%), and the preview/confirm flow. This goes well beyond the schema and annotations (none provided), carrying the full burden of behavioral disclosure.

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 sentences, all relevant, front-loaded with purpose. Fee details are a bit dense but necessary.

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?

Covers purpose, workflow, fees, and irreversibility, with no output schema. Missing details like proof link format, but overall solid for a moderately complex on-chain 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds marginal context about the confirm/dry_run relationship but doesn't add detail to individual params beyond the schema.

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 locks a percentage of creator-held tokens via Streamflow for a duration and produces a proof link, distinguishing it from sibling tools like launch or collect-fees.

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?

It gives context ('Prove you're not dumping') and a clear workflow: preview first, then confirm with confirm: true after approval. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is clear.

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