Solana MCP Server

transfer_sol

Send SOL from your wallet to a destination Solana address. Specify the amount and network to complete the transfer.

Instructions

Transfer SOL from the configured wallet to a destination address. Requires PRIVATE_KEY environment variable.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "to_address": "<to_address>",
      "amount_sol": "<amount_sol>"
    },
    "name": "transfer_sol"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to_address`	Yes	Destination Solana address
`amount_sol`	Yes	Amount of SOL to transfer
`network`	No	Solana network to use — MUST be specified by user for safety

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 27, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. Description only mentions transfer and private key requirement, lacking details on fees, idempotency, errors, or destructive nature.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Very concise: one sentence plus requirement statement. No wasted words, but could benefit from more structure.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a financial transaction tool, description lacks key details like return value, fee handling, or confirmation steps. Incomplete given tool complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds no extra meaning beyond schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states the action (transfer) and resource (SOL), distinguishing from sibling tools like transfer_token. Mentions requirement for PRIVATE_KEY.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention context for choosing transfer_sol over other transfer tools.

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