Armor Crypto MCP

Official

by armorwallet

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

unstake_transaction

Execute an unstake transaction using a quote ID to obtain a swap transaction request.

Instructions

Execute an unstake transaction.

Expects a UnstakeTransactionRequestContainer, returns a SwapTransactionRequestContainer.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "unstake_transaction_requests": "<unstake_transaction_requests>"
    },
    "name": "unstake_transaction"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`unstake_transaction_requests`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`swap_transaction_requests`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 18, 2025

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description does not disclose side effects, state changes, or error behavior. It only states input/output types, which is minimal.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, concise and to the point. The structure is clear, but the technical type reference could be simplified.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (single nested parameter, no descriptions, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It lacks information on prerequisites, return behavior, and failure cases.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema structure. It mentions the container type but that is already defined in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it executes an unstake transaction, with specific input and output types. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'unstake_quote' or 'stake_transaction', though the verb 'execute' contrasts with the quote tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., after obtaining a quote). The description provides no context on prerequisites or scenarios.

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