stellar_keys_generate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses almost nothing. It does not explain that an identity is created/persisted, whether an existing identity is overwritten by default, that funding may hit a network, or what happens if a name already exists. For an 11-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, this is a severe gap.

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?

A single efficient sentence that front-loads the action and the key default (24-word seed phrase). It is concise but under-specified rather than overly trimmed for such a complex tool.

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 11-parameter, mutation-oriented tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is far too thin. It omits prerequisites, persistence/overwrite behavior, funding side effects, and return information, leaving major gaps an agent needs to call it safely.

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 each of the 11 parameters is documented in the schema and the baseline is 3. The description adds the 24-word seed phrase detail but does not explain interactions between parameters (e.g., seed vs. hdPath, network vs. rpcUrl, overwrite implications).

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 (Generate) and resource (new identity) with a concrete detail (24-word seed phrase), so purpose is clear. However, it does not differentiate itself from siblings like stellar_keys_add, stellar_keys_use, or stellar_keys_secret, which all touch the same identity/keys domain and could be confused with generation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as stellar_keys_add (adding an existing key) or stellar_keys_use (switching active identity). The agent must infer the correct context from the tool name alone.

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