prepare_tron_vote

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

Annotations indicate destructive and idempotent behavior; description adds critical context: atomic replacement, TRON Power constraint, reward accrual per block, and that output is a preview+handle for Ledger signing via send_transaction.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and critical warnings. Slightly long (107 words) but each sentence serves a purpose; no redundant content.

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?

Covers all key aspects: operation, prerequisites (availableTRONPower), atomic behavior, output (preview+handle), and next step (send_transaction). No output schema, but description mentions output nature, making it fairly complete.

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 already documents parameters with 100% coverage; description adds valuable nuance for 'votes' (must be full allocation, sum constraint) and 'from' (address format), enhancing usability beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states it builds an unsigned TRON VoteWitnessContract transaction to cast votes for Super Representatives, using precise verbs and resources, and distinguishes from sibling tools like prepare_tron_claim_rewards.

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?

Provides clear when-to-use guidance, explains atomic replacement of prior votes, warns about not passing deltas, recommends checking availableVotes via list_tron_witnesses, and mentions reward harvesting via prepare_tron_claim_rewards.

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