Aave

Get markets / reserves

get_markets

Read-only

List Aave markets/reserves (symbol, APY, caps, liquidity) on v3, v4, or both. Chain coverage: omit chainId and every response states the chains it read as 'chainsCovered', plus 'chainsNotCovered' when it read fewer than all of them. 'chainsNotServed', when present, lists chains this API holds no market on: Aave supports the chain, there is nothing here to read, so an empty result for one of them is not an answer about that chain, and asking again returns the same nothing. v4 always covers every chain it serves; v3 covers every chain when you pass 'symbols' and Ethereum alone when you do not, because an unfiltered 21-chain listing is hundreds of kilobytes. So to compare one asset across chains, pass symbols and no chainId. Every rate is a percent ('3.32' means 3.32%), named with a Pct suffix. Do not rank on APY alone: 'suppliable'/'borrowable' (v4), 'availableLiquidity' and 'totalSuppliedUsd' (v3) say whether a rate can actually be entered, and isFrozen / isPaused / supplyCapReached / borrowCapReached appear only when set, so a reserve with none of them is not flagged. Both versions return one row per reserve under 'reserves', carrying supplyApyPct and borrowApyPct together plus canSupply / canBorrow for the sides that are actually open, so the two versions read the same way. On v4 one asset appears once per spoke, so rows are labelled with 'spoke' and 'hub'; spokes sharing a hub share its rate, so identical APYs across rows are expected rather than duplicates. 'canSwapFrom' (v4) says whether that token can be the sell side of a token swap, which is the per-reserve form of what get_swappable_tokens answers per chain.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`user`	No	Optional wallet address (0x, 40 hex). Adds walletBalance, youCanSupply and youCanBorrow to every row, for this wallet, in the same call. Pass it whenever the question is about what someone can actually do rather than what the rates are.
`chainId`	No	Chain id to restrict to, e.g. 1 for Ethereum. Omit the argument entirely to cover every chain.
`symbols`	No	Optional token symbols to return, e.g. ['USDC','GHO']. Case-insensitive. Strongly preferred when you know the asset: a chain has ~70 reserves and listing them all is a large response.
`version`	No	Protocol version (default all).

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With readOnlyHint already set, the description goes well beyond annotations: it explains chainsCovered, chainsNotCovered, chainsNotServed, why an empty result on an unsupported chain is not an answer, that cap/frozen/paused flags appear only when set, and that repeated identical v4 APYs across spokes are expected. This is substantial behavioral disclosure.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is long but every sentence earns its place by covering a distinct behavioral nuance. It is front-loaded with a clear purpose and then systematically explains chain coverage, flags, version differences, and response shape without redundancy.

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?

Given the complexity of version differences, chain coverage, per-spoke rows, and conditional flags, this description is remarkably complete. With no output schema, it still tells the agent that both versions return one row per reserve with supplyApyPct and borrowApyPct together plus canSupply/canBorrow, closing the most important understanding gaps.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Input schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaning the schema cannot convey: 'v3 covers every chain when you pass symbols and Ethereum alone when you do not', 'pass symbols and no chainId' to compare one asset across chains, and the relationship between canSwapFrom and get_swappable_tokens. This is far beyond the baseline schema repetition.

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 description opens with 'List Aave markets/reserves (symbol, APY, caps, liquidity) on v3, v4, or both', giving a specific verb, resource, and scope. It also differentiates itself from get_swappable_tokens by explaining that canSwapFrom is the per-reserve form of that tool's per-chain answer.

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?

The description gives explicit guidance on when to pass symbols and no chainId, explains the trade-offs of unfiltered queries, and warns against ranking on APY alone. It also names a sibling tool as the alternative for per-chain swappable-token answers, providing clear routing context.

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

All Aave tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tool set is organized into clear read/prepare/action families, and cross-references like get_user_positions vs get_user_summary or get_markets vs get_reserve_details keep purposes distinct. A couple of generic names—prepare_action vs prepare_order, preview_action vs prepare_action—could cause misselection, but the descriptions explicitly separate them.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names overwhelmingly follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern: get_* for reads, prepare_* for transaction builders, plus cancel_order and submit_signed_order. The pattern is consistent overall, though a few generic exceptions like get_started, get_aave_guide, and preview_action break the strict resource-noun convention.

Tool Count2/5

With 40 tools, the set is well past the 25+ threshold and feels heavy even though the domain is broad. Most tools are distinct and justified, but an agent must navigate a very large list, and the server could reasonably be split into protocol, governance, and swap/order surfaces.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers v3/v4 reads, positions, health factors, simulations, transaction building, collateral, eMode, liquidation, rewards, sGHO, swaps/orders, and governance proposal reads, with clear sequencing between preview, prepare, and submit. Minor gaps exist—governance has no voting transaction and stkGHO balance/cooldown state is not readable—but they do not block the core Aave workflows.

Resources

Need Help?