GoTRON MCP Server

get_block

Destructive

Get a TRON block by number or latest. Use include_transactions to get transaction details with decoded contract data (sender, receiver, amounts) and pagination.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max transactions to return when include_transactions is true (default: 50)
`offset`	No	Skip first N transactions (default: 0, for pagination)
`block_number`	No	Block number (omit for latest)
`transaction_type`	No	Filter transactions by type (e.g., 'TransferContract', 'TriggerSmartContract')
`include_transactions`	No	Include decoded transaction details with contract data — sender, receiver, amounts (default: false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed1 schema field changedMar 22, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / include_transactions / description

Previous value: -"Include transaction IDs and types (default: false)"New value: +"Include decoded transaction details with contract data — sender, receiver, amounts (default: false)"

First observedMar 20, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, which directly contradicts the read-only operation implied by 'Get a TRON block'. The description does not address this inconsistency or add any behavioral context beyond what is already in the 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?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a key usage hint. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Because there is no output schema, the description should give more detail about what the agent can expect in the response. It covers transaction details but not the block's own structure or default behaviors. The annotation contradiction also adds confusion.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are well-documented. The description adds value by linking include_transactions to decoded data and pagination, and by clarifying that block_number can be omitted for the latest block.

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 retrieves a TRON block by number or latest, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_transaction by focusing on block retrieval.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear context for using include_transactions to obtain decoded transaction details and pagination. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives like get_transaction, nor does it state exclusions.

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

All GoTRON MCP Server 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

B3.2/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

Several tool groups have overlapping responsibilities (e.g., get_energy_prices/get_bandwidth_prices/get_chain_parameters, get_pending_transactions/get_pending_by_address/is_transaction_pending, and analyze_account vs get_account plus its resource/permission variants). These create boundary confusion despite clear descriptions, and with 43 tools an agent will likely select the wrong one occasionally.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_account, transfer_trx, delegate_resource, unfreeze_balance). Even the few multi-word verbs (estimate_energy, trigger_constant_contract) remain predictable. No camelCase or inconsistent verb styles.

Tool Count2/5

With 43 tools, the server is heavy. While the TRON domain is broad, the tool surface is bloated with many near-synonyms and split functionalities that could be consolidated. The rubric flags 25+ tools as too many; 43 clearly exceeds that.

Completeness3/5

The server covers a wide range of read and transaction-building operations, including staking, governance, contracts, and TRC20. However, it lacks critical lifecycle steps: there is no sign or broadcast tool, and no ability to deploy contracts or create accounts. This is a significant gap for a tool that returns unsigned transactions.

Resources

Need Help?