prepare_tron_unfreeze

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), description details the 14-day cooldown, output format (preview + opaque handle), hardware signing requirement via Ledger, and the relationship between unfreeze and withdraw steps.

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?

Five sentences, each serving a clear purpose: action, constraint, post-action, output, forwarding. No fluff, front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 no output schema, description explains the return value (preview + opaque handle) and how to use it. Covers the full lifecycle from frozen to unfrozen to withdraw, making it complete for a transaction-building tool.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds practical constraints: amount must not exceed frozen balance (links to get_tron_staking), and explains resource enum values (bandwidth for plain txs, energy for smart contracts), which adds value beyond schema descriptions.

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 clearly states it builds an unsigned UnfreezeBalanceV2 transaction, begins a 14-day cooldown, and differentiates from sibling tools like prepare_tron_withdraw_expire_unfreeze by specifying the lifecycle step.

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 instructs to query get_tron_staking first to verify frozen balance, warns of rejection otherwise, and directs to call prepare_tron_withdraw_expire_unfreeze after 14 days. Also mentions forwarding via send_transaction.

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