TRON infrastructure for AI agents.

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

Without annotations, description carries the burden. It discloses the public/unauthenticated nature ('No auth required') but omits other behavioral traits like rate limits, error handling for invalid addresses, or return value format. Adequate but minimal for a read operation.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with purpose ('Get TRC-20...'), followed by input flexibility, then authentication status. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema. Description lacks return value specification (e.g., whether it returns raw or formatted amounts, decimals), which is a notable gap given the absence of an output schema. Otherwise covers the essential invocation context.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline applies. Description repeats the schema's content about supporting symbols (USDT, USDC) or contract addresses, adding no new semantic meaning or format guidance beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Clear verb 'Get' with specific resource 'TRC-20 token balance' and scope 'for an address'. Explicitly names the token standard, distinguishing it from siblings like get_trx_balance (native TRX) and get_balance (likely general/native).

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?

States 'No auth required', which is a critical usage constraint distinguishing it from mutation tools (transfer_trc20, approve_trc20) that likely require authentication. Lacks explicit 'when to use vs get_token_info' comparison, but resource specificity makes this clear.

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