FinTech Hodl Base DeFi risk intel

get_yield_farming

Yield farming opportunities on Base: liquidity pools, concentrated liquidity (Aerodrome Slipstream) and auto-compounding vaults, ranked risk-adjusted, with quoted APY split into fees and token rewards, the sustainable APY once incentives fade, TVL, a risk score, and realized APY where measured. Useful for picking farms worth their risk. 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_yield_farming"
  }
}

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.
`type`	No	lp, stable_lp (stablecoin pairs), concentrated (concentrated liquidity) or vault (auto-compounding vaults).
`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

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the payment model ($0.01 USDC x402), that charging only happens on a 200, and the 404/400-before-payment and 503-while-refreshing behavior. It stops short of rate limits or empty-result behavior, so not a 5.

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?

Purpose and return shape are front-loaded and the sentences carry real information. There is minor redundancy in the pricing clause ('charged only for a 200' followed by 'charged only for a successful answer'), but no 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?

Given eight parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description compensates well: it enumerates the returned fields, states error and payment semantics, and notes id interoperability. An agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 the schema already documents all eight parameters including the sort enum semantics; baseline 3 applies. The description itself adds no parameter-level syntax or defaults beyond what the schema states.

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 and resource ('Yield farming opportunities on Base') and enumerates the return contents (APY split, sustainable APY, TVL, risk score, realized APY), which is well beyond the name. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like get_yields or search_opportunities, so an agent must infer which route to use.

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 picking farms worth their risk' implies the use case but gives no explicit when-to-use-vs-alternatives guidance against get_yields, get_lending_rates, or get_opportunity_card. The note 'Ids work with every other route' is a helpful interop hint but not usage selection.

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?