FinTech Hodl Base DeFi risk intel

get_lending_rates

Lending rates on Base: supply APY for every tracked money market and lending vault (Aave, Morpho, Compound, Moonwell and others), quoted next to the APY lenders actually earned over 7 and 30 days, read on-chain, with a risk score. Useful for choosing where to lend USDC, ETH or stablecoins. Ids work with every other route. 404 for unknown paths and 400 for invalid arguments, before any payment; 503 while data refreshes; charged only for a 200. Price: $0.01 USDC on Base (x402), charged only for a successful answer.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_lending_rates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sort`	No	Order: risk_adjusted (default) ranks by opportunity score; realized_apy by the 30-day realized APY; sustainable_apy by the APY expected once incentives fade.
`asset`	No	Token symbol, e.g. USDC or WETH.
`limit`	No	How many items (default 20).
`min_apy`	No	Minimum quoted APY, percent.
`risk_max`	No	Maximum risk score (0-100, lower is lower modelled risk).
`stable_only`	No	Only stablecoin principal.
`realized_only`	No	Only opportunities with a realized on-chain APY.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does: data is read on-chain, 503 while data refreshes (staleness risk), 404/400 returned before any payment, and pricing of $0.01 USDC via x402 charged only on a 200. That covers cost, error semantics and freshness — exactly the traits an agent needs 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with what the tool returns, followed by use case and then operational/pricing detail. No filler sentences, though the payment caveat appears twice ('charged only for a 200' and 'charged only for a successful answer'), which is mild redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must cover return content, cost and failure modes — it does (quoted APY, 7/30-day realized APY, risk score, payment, error codes). It stops short of describing the response envelope or result shape, which is the only material gap for a 7-param paid query tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every one of the 7 optional parameters is already documented with units, ranges and enum meaning. The description adds only the risk-score concept, which loosely connects to risk_max; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: supply APY for tracked money markets and lending vaults on Base, with named protocols (Aave, Morpho, Compound, Moonwell) and the risk-score/realized-APY framing that separates it from a plain yield list. It does not explicitly name a sibling (get_yields, get_yield_farming, get_opportunity_score), so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

'Useful for choosing where to lend USDC, ETH or stablecoins' gives an implied context, and 'Ids work with every other route' hints at composition with siblings. There is no explicit when-not or a named alternative for the read paths it overlaps with.

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

All FinTech Hodl Base DeFi risk intel 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.

Resources

Need Help?