TRON infrastructure for AI agents.

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden and effectively reveals the on-chain nature ('Signs and broadcasts on-chain'), side effects (bandwidth checks, potential Merx purchases), and authentication requirements. Missing only failure modes and rate limit disclosures.

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?

Four declarative sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Every clause adds unique behavioral or prerequisite information without repetition, making it information-dense yet readable.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema and annotations, the description adequately covers the execution flow, preconditions, and on-chain effects for a blockchain transfer operation. Would benefit from mentioning the return value (e.g., transaction hash) but sufficiently complete for safe invocation.

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 has 100% description coverage for both parameters (to_address, amount_trx), meeting the baseline expectation. However, the description fails to clarify critical semantics like whether amount_trx expects TRX units or smallest decimal units (sun), which is vital for correct usage.

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 immediately specifies the exact action (Send), resource (TRX), and target (address), distinguishing it clearly from sibling tools like transfer_trc20 (which handles TRC20 tokens) and deposit_trx (which implies receiving funds).

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?

Explicitly states the critical prerequisite 'Requires TRON_PRIVATE_KEY' and describes the automatic resource management behavior ('Checks bandwidth, buys via Merx if needed'). However, it lacks explicit differentiation from transfer_trc20 for users deciding between native TRX and token transfers.

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