Skip to main content
Glama

bobai

by com.brainonbnb

pancakeswap_fee_tiers

Read-only

For a liquidity provider deciding WHERE to put liquidity on PancakeSwap. A pair lives in up to five pools at once — V2 at 0.25% and V3 at 0.01%, 0.05%, 0.25% and 1.00% — and every source ranks them by the money already parked in them, which does not say which one pays. This measures each tier over a live window: swaps, turnover, the fees the pool actually paid out, and those fees per $1,000 of capital — over TWO denominators. The first is everything the pool holds, which is what every interface shows. The second is the capital standing within 2% of the current price, reconstructed by walking the tick book of the pool itself, because concentrated liquidity parked far from the price earns nothing and a new dollar only competes with the capital that is at the price. The two rankings disagree often, and both are returned. It also names tiers holding real money that did not trade at all. Measured, never annualised: the window is about forty minutes of chain and is reported with the answer.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesA BSC token address, or a PancakeSwap pool address to pin the pair

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds substantial behavioral context: the measurement window is about forty minutes, values are not annualized, two ranking denominators are used, in-range capital is reconstructed from the tick book, and tiers with no trades are also reported. This is far beyond what the annotations convey.

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 carries essential information about methodology, denominators, window, and output. It is front-loaded with the intended use case and avoids fluff. The complexity of the tool justifies the length.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what the agent will get: swaps, turnover, fees paid, fees per $1,000 of capital under two denominators, both rankings, and non-trading tiers. It also discloses the time window and measurement style, making the tool's behavior sufficiently clear for correct invocation and interpretation.

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 the only parameter, address, is already documented as accepting a BSC token address or a PancakeSwap pool address to pin the pair. The description does not add additional parameter-level detail or syntax guidance beyond this, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific purpose: measuring PancakeSwap fee tiers to help a liquidity provider decide where to put liquidity. It specifies the resource (PancakeSwap pools at V2 0.25% and V3 fee tiers) and clearly differentiates from sibling tools by focusing on actual fees paid vs simple TVL rankings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly frames when to use it: when a liquidity provider is deciding where to deploy capital across fee tiers. It gives strong context but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, such as 'use pancakeswap_range_plan for range selection instead', so it stops short of a 5.

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

All bobai toolsInspect
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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Several tools operate on overlapping data: bobai_burned, bobai_activity, and bobai_smart_money all report burn-related metrics, while bobai_token_info, bobai_circulating_supply, and bobai_burned overlap on supply numbers. The long descriptions mitigate this, but the purpose boundaries are less crisp than ideal. The BSC pool tools are more easily told apart.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most token tools use a consistent bobai_* snake_case prefix, but the set mixes conventions: bnb_agent_*, bsc_pool_scan, find_agents_on_bnb_chain, and pancakeswap_fee_tiers break the pattern. The names are still readable and mostly noun-oriented. There is no chaotic mixing of camelCase or vague verbs, but the pattern is not uniform.

Tool Count3/5

19 tools sits in the borderline heavy range for a token research server. Many are focused data views, but some could be consolidated, such as bobai_token_info with circulating supply/burned, or the informational guide/links/tokenomics cluster. Each tool has a defensible role, but the overall surface feels padded.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows are well covered: price, liquidity, DEX parameters, purchase guidance, burns, wallet balances, and BNB agent discovery. Missing historical price/volume, holder distributions, or detailed per-agent profiles, but these are minor gaps rather than dead ends. The server gives an agent what it needs to understand and interact with $BOBAI.

Resources