stake.link Agents (stakedotlink.money)

sdl_build_unstake_link

Build an unsigned stLINK redemption queue transaction through the Withdrawal Pool.

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": {
      "amount": "<amount>",
      "from": "<from>"
    },
    "name": "sdl_build_unstake_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`from`	Yes	Signer wallet address.
`amount`	Yes	stLINK amount in human-readable form.
`simulate`	No	Run Tenderly simulation. Default: true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose that the output is 'unsigned' (no key handling), which is useful, but it omits whether this consumes stLINK, that the redemption is queued and claimed later, permission requirements, or the simulate default already in schema.

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?

A single efficient sentence that front-loads the operation type and target. No wasted words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a build tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers what is built and via which pool, but leaves the return format, fund consumption, and queued-redemption lifecycle unstated. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 'from', 'amount', and 'simulate' are already documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning about the amount denomination context or simulation behavior, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb ('Build'), resource ('unsigned stLINK redemption queue transaction'), and mechanism ('through the Withdrawal Pool'). This clearly contrasts with the sibling sdl_build_stake_link (the reverse operation), though it does not explicitly name siblings.

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 indication of when to use this versus alternatives like sdl_build_stake_link, sdl_build_wrap_stlink, or sdl_get_withdrawal_pool, and no prerequisites or sequencing guidance are given. Usage must be inferred from the name alone.

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

All stake.link Agents (stakedotlink.money) tools Inspect

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

Need Help?