Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

powersun-tron-mcp

by io.github.Hovsteder
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Auto-Action History

get_auto_action_history

View execution history of automatic actions (stake, vote, claim) for your pool. Shows status (success/failed/skipped), amounts, transaction hashes, and timestamps. Requires API key.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_auto_action_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNumber of records to return (default: 20, max: 100)
actionTypeNoFilter by action type
poolAddressNoPool address to get history for. If omitted, uses your first registered pool.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / poolAddress / maxLength
      Added value: +34
  3. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: 'View' indicates a read-only operation, 'Requires API key' discloses an authentication prerequisite, and the listed return fields (status, amounts, transaction hashes, timestamps) give useful output context. It does not mention rate limits, pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter, or explicitly state that no side effects occur, leaving minor gaps.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two tightly written sentences: the first states purpose and scope, the second adds output and auth details. There is no redundant or filler text, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a read-only history tool with a fully documented input schema and no output schema, the description supplies the key missing context: what is returned, what statuses mean, and that an API key is required. It could be slightly more complete by noting pagination behavior or explicitly stating the operation is non-destructive, but it is sufficient for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema already states; 'for your pool' loosely relates to poolAddress's default behavior but does not clarify it further.

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?

The description uses a specific verb ('View execution history') and resource ('automatic actions (stake, vote, claim) for your pool'), making the tool's scope immediately clear. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_auto_selling_config (configuration) and trigger_vote (action execution) without needing to inspect schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the phrase 'View execution history of automatic actions', but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling tools are named, and no exclusions or prerequisites beyond 'Requires API key' are given.

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

All powersun-tron-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources