create_token

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It discloses a mutation (creates on-chain token mint) and requires a private key, but does not mention side effects (e.g., cost in SOL, mint authority implications), return value format, or failure modes.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and a key requirement. It is concise and to the point, though it could include more detail without becoming wordy.

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?

The tool is moderately complex (creates a token mint on a blockchain), but the description lacks details on return values, prerequisites (e.g., network funding), and other behavioral context. No output schema exists, so the description should provide more completeness.

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?

Both parameters (decimals, network) have descriptions in the input schema covering their meaning and constraints. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond the schema, 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?

The description clearly states 'Create a new SPL token mint' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mint_tokens (which mints into existing token accounts) and transfer_token (which transfers tokens).

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 only mentions 'Requires PRIVATE_KEY', which is a prerequisite but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., mint_tokens, create_token_account). No when-not-to-use or alternative references.

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