stellar_contract_invoke

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing critical behavioral traits: whether this requires signing, what happens on failure, whether it sends a transaction by default, or the implications of parameters like 'send' or 'build_only'. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, clear sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. It is appropriately sized and contains 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?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, mutation operation, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It should explain return values, side effects, and key behavioral aspects like transaction sending and simulation options to be 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters, including enums and nested objects. The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb ('Invoke') and resource ('a function on a deployed Soroban contract'), which clearly conveys the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from siblings like stellar_contract_deploy and stellar_contract_read by focusing on function invocation, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 provides a basic indication of when to use this tool (invoking a function on a deployed contract), but it does not specify when to use it versus alternatives such as stellar_tx_simulate or stellar_contract_read, nor does it mention prerequisites like contract deployment.

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