prepare_tron_withdraw_expire_unfreeze

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

Description adds context beyond annotations: it discloses the return value (preview + opaque handle), the need to forward via `send_transaction` for USB-HID signing, and the error condition. Annotations (`destructiveHint: true`, `idempotentHint: true`) are consistent and supplemented.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence serves a distinct function (purpose, usage hint, prerequisite, output, next step). No wasted words despite covering multiple aspects.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully explains the workflow, prerequisites, error case, and return value. It references a related tool (`get_tron_staking`) and the follow-up step (`send_transaction`), making it self-contained.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single parameter `from`, and the schema description already explains the parameter well. The tool description repeats similar information, adding no new semantic insight beyond what the schema provides.

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 the tool's verb ('Build an unsigned TRON WithdrawExpireUnfreeze transaction') and resource ('sweeps every matured unfreeze slice... back to liquid TRX'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like `prepare_tron_unfreeze` by focusing on expired unfreezes and specifying no amount is needed.

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 explicit prerequisite ('Inspect `pendingUnfreezes` from `get_tron_staking` first') and warns of a specific error condition ('if every entry's unlockAt is still in the future... this tool errors'). Implicitly advises when to use, though does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like `prepare_tron_unfreeze`.

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