Skip to main content
Glama

list_tron_witnesses

Read-onlyIdempotent

List TRON Super Representatives and candidates ranked by votes, with APR estimates. Optionally include your vote allocation to plan your next vote.

Instructions

List TRON Super Representatives (SRs) + SR candidates, ranked by total vote count. Active SRs (rank ≤ 27, isActive: true) produce blocks and distribute the 160 TRX/block voter-reward pool pro-rata to their voters; every witness in the top 127 shares the same APR estimate (pro-rata split of the pool); witnesses ranked > 127 get estVoterApr: 0. APR estimates assume current mainnet constants (3-second blocks, 27 active SRs, 365 days/year) and are best-effort — actual rewards depend on missed blocks and competing voters shifting between your vote tx and reward claim. When address is passed, also returns userVotes, totalTronPower, totalVotesCast, and availableVotes so you can diff against a target allocation before calling prepare_tron_vote. Defaults to top-27 only; pass includeCandidates: true for the long tail.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressNoOptional base58 TRON address. When provided, the response also includes the wallet's current vote allocation, total TRON Power (frozenV2 sum in whole TRX), and remaining available votes — diff these against your target allocation before building `prepare_tron_vote`.
includeCandidatesNoInclude SR candidates (rank > 27) alongside the active top 27. Candidates don't produce blocks so their voter APR is 0. Defaults to false.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable context: APR estimate assumptions, best-effort nature, and that candidates have 0% APR. No contradiction with annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, well-structured paragraph with front-loaded purpose, efficient sentences, and no fluff. Every sentence adds information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no output schema, the description adequately covers the main output: ranked list of witnesses with APR info, and for address parameter, additional vote fields. It implicitly describes the structure but could explicitly mention the response is an array of witness objects.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The overall description reinforces the usage of the address parameter to retrieve vote allocation data for preparing votes, adding marginal value beyond the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'TRON Super Representatives (SRs) + SR candidates', with explicit ranking by total vote count. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_solana_validators' and mentions its relation to 'prepare_tron_vote' when the address parameter is used.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explains when to use the address parameter (to diff vote allocation before voting) and the default behavior (top-27 only, with optional candidate inclusion). It also notes APR limitations, but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or list alternatives beyond the implied prefatory role to voting.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/szhygulin/recon-crypto-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server