Crank Protocol

get_lst_yields

Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare APY across LST providers (Marinade/Jito/Blaze) with MEV-boost + validator-count descriptors.

Workflow: YIELDS step -- staking keeps SOL exposure + earns yield (vs lending, which removes price exposure). Best APY becomes the 'park it' leg of the allocation; execute via liquid_stake. See get_trading_workflow.

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_lst_yields"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`caller_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. Description adds that the tool compares APY and mentions descriptors, aligning with annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Extremely concise with front-loaded purpose and workflow integration. No wasted words.

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?

Adequately covers functionality and workflow for a read-only tool with output schema. Minor omission of parameter detail but overall sufficient.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Only parameter caller_id is not described in text, and schema description coverage is 0%. Parameter is optional with default, but description should at least mention its purpose.

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?

Clearly states the tool compares APY across LST providers (Marinade/Jito/Blaze) with descriptors like MEV-boost and validator-count, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_lending_rates or liquid_stake.

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?

Provides workflow context: positions this as a 'YIELDS step' contrasting staking vs lending, and guides to execute via liquid_stake. Lacks explicit exclusions but gives clear usage scenario.

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

All Crank Protocol 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?