TronSave MCP Server

Official

by tronsave

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Extendable Delegates

tronsave_list_extendable_delegates

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists extendable delegate candidates for a TRON receiver by ENERGY or BANDWIDTH resource, with optional suggestData scoring to plan extend-and-buy scenarios without creating orders.

Instructions

List extendable delegate candidates for a receiver and resourceType (ENERGY|BANDWIDTH). Optional suggestData scores an extend-and-buy scenario for planning purposes. Read-only; does NOT create orders or change on-chain state. No login required. NOTE: this is GraphQL market data for discovery only. To actually submit an extension, use tronsave_internal_create_extend_request with extendData from the authenticated REST POST /v2/get-extendable-delegates (payload shape differs from this GraphQL response).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`receiver`	Yes	TRON base58 address (typically starts with `T`) that currently receives or will receive the delegated resource. This is the primary filter: the response describes delegates relevant to extending that account's delegation.
`requester`	No	Optional TRON base58 address of the viewing/requesting party. When an MCP session is active, the server may still derive identity from auth headers; use this when the API expects an explicit requester string distinct from the receiver.
`suggestData`	No	Optional nested scenario for extend-and-buy suggestion scoring. If omitted, the query returns delegate rows without that hypothetical. If provided, supply all four fields together; partial objects are invalid for typical GraphQL input shapes.
`resourceType`	Yes	Which resource market leg to query: `ENERGY` for contract execution headroom, `BANDWIDTH` for transaction bandwidth. Must match how you plan to extend or buy.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`extendableDelegates`	No	Null when the market has no payload or GraphQL returned no branch; check tool-level errors for hard failures.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.4.0Nov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds real context beyond them: no login required, this is GraphQL market data only, and suggestData is server-side scoring rather than a live order. It stops short of describing pagination or result size limits for what is a list endpoint.

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?

The scope statement and the read-only/no-login facts are front-loaded, and each subsequent sentence (GraphQL vs REST, sibling routing) carries non-redundant information. It is dense with backticked identifiers, but nothing is filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 4-parameter read tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description covers the remaining unknowns an agent would hit: auth requirements, data source (GraphQL vs REST), and how to proceed to the actual extension. Return values are correctly left to the output schema.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and every parameter, including the nested suggestData object, is already richly documented in the schema. The description adds only the ENERGY|BANDWIDTH gloss and the framing of suggestData as a planning scenario, so the schema is doing the heavy lifting and the baseline of 3 applies.

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 first sentence names a specific verb+resource (list extendable delegate candidates) and states the two key filters, receiver and resourceType, with the enum values inline. It also distinguishes itself from the write-path sibling tronsave_internal_create_extend_request, so an agent can tell the two apart without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit when-to-use (discovery/planning) and when-not (does NOT create orders or change on-chain state), plus the named alternative for the actual mutation and the note that the authenticated REST payload shape differs from this GraphQL response. It also states no login is required, which removes an otherwise likely blocker.

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

Deploy Server