TRON Energy/Bandwidth MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses critical safety behavior ('All existing account permissions are preserved'), output format ('Returns an unsigned transaction'), auth requirements ('Requires authentication'), and security-sensitive step ('sign with your private key'). Lacks rate limits or idempotency details.

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 sentences with zero waste: (1) transaction purpose and permissions granted, (2) return value and next-step workflow, (3) safety preservation guarantee, (4) auth requirement. Front-loaded with specific transaction type (AccountPermissionUpdate).

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?

Complete for multi-step blockchain workflow despite missing output schema and annotations. Explains unsigned nature of output, signing requirement, and chain to broadcaster. Could specify what happens if poolAddress lacks initial setup, but sufficient for complexity level.

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% with detailed field descriptions (T-address format, VoteWitness permission explanation). Description adds semantic context that permissions are granted to 'PowerSun platform' specifically, but schema carries primary semantic load for parameters.

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?

Specific verb 'Build' paired with specific resource 'AccountPermissionUpdate transaction' and scope (grants PowerSun platform permission to delegate/undelegate/vote). Clearly distinguishes from sibling check_pool_permissions (which checks) and broadcast_signed_permission_tx (which broadcasts signed tx).

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 chains to sibling tool by stating user must 'broadcast using broadcast_signed_permission_tx' after signing. Establishes clear workflow order: build → sign → broadcast. Provides implicit 'when' by describing the permission-granting purpose.

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