hedera_unpause_token
Build an unsigned transaction to unpause a paused Hedera token, restoring its transferability.
Instructions
Build (unsigned) a token unpause.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tokenId | Yes | ||
| payerAccountId | No |
Build an unsigned transaction to unpause a paused Hedera token, restoring its transferability.
Build (unsigned) a token unpause.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tokenId | Yes | ||
| payerAccountId | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only mentions 'Build (unsigned)', which implies transaction creation but does not disclose mutation semantics, required permissions, or side effects. Critical behavioral details are missing.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence, making it concise but severely under-specified. It sacrifices completeness for brevity, leaving the agent without enough information to use the tool correctly.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has no output schema and no annotations. The one-sentence description does not explain the output (an unsigned transaction), return format, or any behavioral impacts. This is critically incomplete for a transaction-building tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema defines tokenId and payerAccountId, but the description does not explain either parameter. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should clarify parameter roles and constraints but fails to do so.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states 'Build (unsigned) a token unpause.' This vaguely indicates it constructs an unsigned transaction to unpause a token, but it is not specific about what 'token unpause' entails and does not differentiate from the sibling tool hedera_pause_token. The verb 'Build' is generic and the phrase is not standard.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hedera_pause_token or other token management tools. There are no usage constraints, prerequisites, or context hints.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ExpertVagabond/hedera-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server