SAP MCP Server

Raydium-pools Add Liquidity

raydium-pools_addLiquidity

Add liquidity to a Raydium pool (CPMM, CLMM, or AMM v4). SAP MCP context: This Synapse AgentKit tool is served beside the sap_* SDK tools. Use sap_agent_identity_plan, sap_payments_register_agent, sap_payments_update_agent, and sap_publish_tool_by_name when the capability should become part of an on-chain SAP agent profile or tool registry entry.

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool when the runtime cannot replay x402 natively. Routing: hosted accountless write is blocked; do not call this as a paid hosted write and no x402 payment should be charged. Use the local sap_payments bridge or a hosted unsigned builder when user signing is required. Signer boundary: user-controlled local profile or external signer; OOBE hosted MCP remains non-custodial.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`poolId`	Yes	Raydium pool ID
`wallet`	Yes	Solana public key (base58)
`amountA`	No	Raw token amount (smallest unit)
`amountB`	No	Raw token amount (smallest unit)
`fixedSide`	No	Fixed side for single-sided liquidity
`priceLower`	No	Lower price for CLMM range
`priceUpper`	No	Upper price for CLMM range

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`content`	Yes	MCP content blocks returned to the caller.
`isError`	No	True when the tool result represents an application-level error.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJul 24, 2026

addedInput schema / description

Added value: +"Raydium-pools Add Liquidity input schema. Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool when the runtime cannot replay x402 natively. Routing: hosted accountless write is blocked; do not call this as a paid hosted write and no x402 payment should be charged. Use the local sap_payments bridge or a hosted unsigned builder when user signing is required. Signer boundary: user-controlled local profile or external signer; OOBE hosted MCP remains non-custodial. Use exact field names from this schema; do not guess aliases or include private key material."

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, confirming a write operation. The description says 'Add liquidity' but does not disclose behavioral details such as token transfers, slippage, fees, or authorization needs. With no annotation contradiction, the description adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description front-loads the core purpose but then includes lengthy SAP MCP integration context that may not be relevant for generic MCP use. This reduces conciseness; it could be trimmed to focus on essential behavioral and parameter guidance.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (multiple pool types, 7 parameters, output schema), the description is incomplete. It fails to explain how to choose pool type, parameter relationships, or expected outcomes. Annotations provide minimal context, making the description insufficient for full understanding.

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% with descriptive parameter names and types. The description does not add extra meaning about parameter dependencies or usage context (e.g., which parameters apply to CPMM vs CLMM). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already handles parameter documentation.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states 'Add liquidity to a Raydium pool (CPMM, CLMM, or AMM v4).' It clearly identifies the verb (add) and resource (liquidity to Raydium pool). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling raydium-pools tools like removeLiquidity or create, though the action is different.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It includes SAP MCP integration context but does not explain prerequisites, pool selection criteria, or when not to use it. No explicit comparison to removeLiquidity or other liquidity tools.

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

All SAP MCP Server tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.