Skip to main content
Glama

Genexxis paid agent tools (x402)

defi_pool

One DeFi pool by DefiLlama id: current APY split, TVL, risk flags and its daily APY and TVL history for the last 30 days with min/max/avg. Price: $0.005 USDC per call, paid with x402 on Base.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesDefiLlama pool id (UUID) from /yields

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose the returned data, the 30-day history with min/max/avg, and the payment requirement of $0.005 USDC per call via x402 on Base. It does not mention error behavior, rate limits, or data freshness, but the cost/payment disclosure is unusually valuable.

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 definition is two sentences with no waste: the data returned is front-loaded, and the payment sentence is short and necessary. Every element earns its place.

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?

For a single-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately explains both the returned fields and the cost/payment model. Nothing essential for selecting or invoking the tool is missing.

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% for the single id parameter, so the schema already explains that it is a DefiLlama pool UUID from /yields. The description repeats the id dependency but adds no additional syntax, format, or validation detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 names a specific resource and scope: one DeFi pool selected by DefiLlama id, returning current APY split, TVL, risk flags, and 30-day APY/TVL history. It is clear enough that an agent can distinguish this from list-oriented siblings such as defi_yields, though it does not explicitly name an alternative.

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?

Usage is only implied by the requirement of a DefiLlama pool id; the description never states when to call this tool versus defi_yields, defi_summary, or yields_curve. There are no exclusions, prerequisites beyond the id, or alternative-routing guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources