Tronsave MCP Testnet

Update Auto Sell Setting

tronsave_update_auto_sell_setting

Update the existing auto-sell configuration with partial fields. Returns the updated autoSettings payload. Side effect: overwrites stored automation settings for the current user; not idempotent across different field sets. Requires a signature session and mcp-session-id. Use for INCREMENTAL changes after registration; read the baseline via tronsave_get_user_auto_setting to avoid accidental resets, and use tronsave_register_auto_sell only for first-time setup. Fails for invalid field combinations, unauthorized sessions, or policy constraints.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`poolSetting`	No
`addOnFeature`	No
`paymentConfig`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	Yes	GraphQL mutation status code (HTTP-like; `0`/`200` indicates success). Always pair with `success` for routing.
`data`	Yes	Opaque server-defined payload (tx id, setting id, or status text). Treat as identifier-or-message; rely on `message` for human routing.
`message`	Yes	Human-readable status text. Populated even on success; localized error messages may appear here on failure.
`success`	Yes	Whether the mutation succeeded at the backend level. Always check this before reading `data`.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Discloses side effect (overwrites stored automation settings) and non-idempotency across different field sets beyond annotations. Also mentions required session and session-id. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Concise, front-loaded purpose, no extraneous words. Well-structured with one clear sentence each for purpose, side-effect, usage guidance, and failure conditions.

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?

Covers side effects, prerequisites, failure modes, return value, and sibling differentiation. Missing only minor details like authentication requirements (implied by session-id) and idempotency nuances, but overall adequate for a complex tool with many siblings and a large schema.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not explain the three top-level parameters (poolSetting, addOnFeature, paymentConfig) or their fields. The phrase 'partial fields' minimally implies optionality but lacks semantic depth for a complex nested 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?

The description clearly states the tool updates an existing auto-sell configuration with partial fields, distinguishing it from `tronsave_register_auto_sell` for first-time setup. The verb 'Update' and resource 'auto-sell configuration' are specific.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states to use for incremental changes after registration, advises reading baseline via `tronsave_get_user_auto_setting` to avoid resets, and notes failure conditions (invalid fields, unauthorized sessions, policy constraints). Clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use.

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

All Tronsave MCP Testnet tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes, such as multiple order creation tools (tronsave_create_order, tronsave_internal_order_create, tronsave_internal_create_extend_request) and multiple estimation tools (tronsave_estimate_buy_resource, tronsave_get_min_price, tronsave_internal_order_estimate). This would confuse an agent trying to select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tools follow a tronsave_verb_noun pattern with snake_case, but verbs are inconsistent (e.g., list vs get, create vs register) and the internal_ prefix creates two distinct naming styles. Some tools like tronsave_internal_order_book and tronsave_list_order_books are confusingly similar.

Tool Count2/5

29 tools is excessive for a server focused on a single market. Many tools duplicate functionality for internal vs signature authentication, bloating the surface. A more streamlined set (e.g., 10-15) would be more appropriate.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers core operations like CRUD for orders, account info, and auto-settings. However, there are gaps: no explicit delete for auto-sell settings, and manual sell is the only sell option. Some internal tools appear redundant, but overall coverage is adequate.

Resources

Need Help?