Using Gemini to inspect a wallet transaction

Gemini can help inspect a wallet transaction when you give it the source and ask for a bounded explanation. The useful output is a map of fields and questions. It is not an automatic approval or a substitute for the wallet prompt.

Ask for inspection, not a prediction

Paste a redacted quote, digest, or transaction summary and ask for a fixed format:

Read this transaction using only the supplied fields. Return network, asset identity, amount, gas, route, minimum received, recipient, status, and missing values. Explain each field in one sentence. Do not add a current price, infer a successful confirmation, or sign anything.

For a comparison, give Gemini two records from the same time window and ask it to calculate only visible differences. If one record omits a route or expiry, the correct answer is that the comparison is incomplete.

The same exercise works with a screenshot or a hand-transcribed wallet panel. Limit the request to fields that are actually visible:

Inspect this screenshot or transcription only. Return the network, asset type, amount, recipient, gas, route, minimum received, and displayed status. Mark each field visible, not visible, or unclear; quote the nearby label when possible. Do not infer a price, recipient, confirmation, or signature from pixels. Ask me for a clearer crop when a value is unreadable.

For example, if the transcription says amount: 12.4, network: Sui, and status: [cropped], the useful result leaves recipient, gas, route, minimum received, and status as missing. It does not turn the amount into a confirmed transfer. This makes the model’s missing-data behavior inspectable before any function call is considered.

How function calling changes the workflow

Google’s Gemini function-calling guide describes four steps: declare a function, send the prompt with the declaration, execute the function in your application, and send the result back to the model. The model does not execute the function itself. That is the right mental model for any wallet-adjacent tool: a host may fetch data, but a wallet still controls authorization.

Gemini’s tool documentation also distinguishes built-in tools from custom functions. Availability, model, host, and account settings can change what a reader sees, so do not write “Gemini supports this SUI tool” without checking the actual integration. If a compatible host exposes the SUI BROKERS participant kit, its six tools return public reads or a review-only plan. The plan does not quote, build, sign, send, boot a wallet, activate a referral, or mint an NFT.

Compare an unsupported asset with a valid route

An invalid asset fixture is a good learning example. Ask Gemini to validate the supplied coin type against the tool schema or application input. The expected result is a clear validation error and a request for correction. It should not silently replace the asset with a ticker that looks familiar.

Then use a valid, clearly labelled route and ask Gemini to summarize the returned source origin and asOf time. A successful read tells you what the service reported at that moment. It does not prove that the wallet can sign the transaction or that the quote will remain available.

At the wallet boundary, check the connected network, assets, amount, recipient, gas, and slippage in the current app and wallet prompt. If you decline, there is no settled activity. If you sign, wait for confirmation and a service readback before calling the event verified.

Use Gemini to expose missing evidence and to make structured data readable. Keep any function declaration, returned source, and timestamp attached to the supplied record. A model summary of a screenshot is still an explanation; a function result is still application data; neither one is a wallet signature or a confirmed ledger event.