GoTRON MCP Server

get_trc20_transfers

Destructive

Get TRC20 token transfer history for a TRON address via TronGrid REST API. Returns a compact summary per transfer with token info. Use a small limit and paginate with fingerprint to control response size

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Number of results to return (1-200, default 10). Start small to avoid large responses; use fingerprint to paginate for more
`address`	Yes	TRON base58 address (starts with T)
`only_to`	No	Only show incoming transfers
`only_from`	No	Only show outgoing transfers
`fingerprint`	No	Pagination cursor from previous response meta.fingerprint — pass to fetch the next page
`max_timestamp`	No	Maximum block timestamp in milliseconds
`min_timestamp`	No	Minimum block timestamp in milliseconds
`only_confirmed`	No	Only return confirmed transactions

Schema Changelog

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

AddedMar 22, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description presents a read-only lookup ('Get TRC20 token transfer history'), but the annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, which directly contradict the described behavior. This is a serious inconsistency with no explanatory context added.

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 two sentences with front-loaded purpose, followed by practical pagination guidance. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

Given 8 parameters and a rich schema, the description covers the essential operational concern (response size control) and notes the return format ('compact summary per transfer with token info'). It does not explain every parameter, but the schema fills that gap, and no output schema is present.

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 the schema documents all parameters. The description adds only general advice about limit and fingerprint, which largely echoes the schema. No additional semantic value beyond the schema is provided.

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 a specific action ('Get') and resource ('TRC20 token transfer history for a TRON address'), naming the underlying API (TronGrid REST). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_transaction_history or get_trc20_balance which cover different scopes.

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?

The description gives operational guidance on controlling response size ('Use a small limit and paginate with fingerprint'), but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use. The TRC20 qualifier implies when it should be used, but no exclusions are given.

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?