TRON Energy/Bandwidth MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, yet description effectively discloses return structure (price per unit in SUN, tiered by duration) and pricing semantics (minimum prices). Missing operational details like data freshness or rate limits, but compensates adequately for simple 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?

Optimal two-sentence structure: first establishes operation and scope, second specifies return format. Zero redundancy, every clause adds specific domain information (SUN currency, duration tiers, minimum prices).

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?

Appropriate for complexity level. Explains return values (SUN pricing, duration tiers) compensating for missing output schema. Establishes TRON blockchain context essential for distinguishing from generic price tools. Could mention relationship to payment/buying workflows.

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 clear enum description. Description adds domain context by explicitly naming 'TRON Energy and Bandwidth' and clarifying the filter behavior (default: all), reinforcing the optional nature of resourceType parameter.

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?

Excellent specificity: states exact resources (TRON Energy/Bandwidth), pricing model (minimum prices), and scope (all duration tiers). Clearly distinguishes from siblings like buy_energy (execution), estimate_cost (calculation), and get_available_resources (inventory) by focusing on current market price retrieval.

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?

Implies usage context ('current' prices suggests pre-transaction market check), but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus estimate_cost or buy_energy. Does not mention prerequisites like needing to know SUN currency unit or duration tier concepts.

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