intel

hire_plan_yieldopt

Plan a hire of the ChainHelix yieldopt agent (ERC-8004 #269226, Yield allocation across pools). Given candidate pools with APY, optional TVL and risk score, and the capital to place, returns the allocation per pool under concentration and TVL-share caps, the blended APY and any capital left unallocated because a cap bound first. Deterministic arithmetic, no custody, no execution. Send the job parameters; you get back the agent's live wallet-signed quote (the job price, paid into escrow on chain when you fund) and the createJob calldata to sign from YOUR wallet, then fund and tell the agent (steps in the answer). This call is free; the job is not. The parameters here are exactly what the agent accepts; the same schema is on its agent card at https://agents.chainhelix.io/yieldopt/.well-known/agent-card.json. Example: {"pools":{"pcs-wbnb-usdt":{"apyPct":12.5,"tvlUsd":50000000,"riskScore":2},"venus-usdt":{"apyPct":6.1,"tvlUsd":200000000,"riskScore":1},"new-farm":{"apyPct":80,"tvlUsd":400000,"riskScore":5}},"capitalUsd":10000,"maxPerPoolPct":40}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`pools`	No	candidate pools keyed by name; riskScore 1 (safest) to 5, default 3 (also accepted as: opportunities, vaults, farms)
`terms`	No	optional ERC-8183 terms {deliverables, quality_standards}; the agent quotes its fixed price either way
`tvlCapPct`	No	max share of a pool's TVL to hold, default 5
`capitalUsd`	No	capital to allocate (also accepted as: budgetUsd, capital, budget, amountUsd)
`riskAversion`	No	0 chases raw APY, 1 applies the full risk discount, default 0.5
`maxPerPoolPct`	No	max share of capital in one pool, at most 100, default 40

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tx`	No
`next`	No
`plan`	No
`agent`	Yes
`error`	No
`example`	No
`missing`	No
`envelope`	No
`expected`	No
`erc8004Id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 21, 2026

changedInput schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256

Previous value: -"a1c2e10fd3177d6b4d59ca78693e8fb36880165cf0f735f680dd86a510411178"New value: +"e5b4290024a229f2bdf97f8fc6a0079c3fe13b77267f41fdcffeb8b26aa1c41e"

Changed1 schema field changedSep 19, 2026

changedInput schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256

Previous value: -"1eeb782ee15fe69fc80776948e0556fa6b795e210e6305935b2c97b73d955cda"New value: +"a1c2e10fd3177d6b4d59ca78693e8fb36880165cf0f735f680dd86a510411178"

Changed1 schema field changedSep 19, 2026

changedInput schema / x-lexicon / bundleSha256

Previous value: -"c014292cad7497ce9fd68c33345ac32cb42b672c8e77d6c749c26e162cc207e4"New value: +"1eeb782ee15fe69fc80776948e0556fa6b795e210e6305935b2c97b73d955cda"

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 19, 2026

addedInput schema / x-aliases

Added value: +{
+  "capitalUsd": [
+    "budget_usd",
+    "budgetUsd",
+    "capital",
+    "budget",
+    "amountUsd"
+  ],
+  "pools": [
+    "pool",
+    "_pool",
+    "opportunities",
+    "vaults",
+    "farms"
+  ]
+}

addedInput schema / x-lexicon

Added value: +{
+  "bundleSha256": "c014292cad7497ce9fd68c33345ac32cb42b672c8e77d6c749c26e162cc207e4",
+  "name": "ChainHelix Agentic Lexicon",
+  "resolve": "lexicon_resolve",
+  "spec": "lexicon_spec",
+  "version": "0.1.0"
+}

addedInput schema / x-vocab

Added value: +{
+  "capitalUsd": "agent.budgetUsd",
+  "maxPerPoolPct": "defi.maxPerPoolPct",
+  "pools": "defi.pool",
+  "riskAversion": "defi.riskAversion",
+  "terms": "data.terms",
+  "tvlCapPct": "defi.tvlCapPct"
+}

AddedSep 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and handles it well. It discloses deterministic arithmetic, no custody, no execution, that the call is free while the job is not, and that the response includes a wallet-signed quote and createJob calldata for the user's own wallet.

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?

The description is dense but each sentence adds value: purpose, behavior, workflow, cost, canonical schema link, and example. It is longer than minimal, partly because it restates the example already present in the schema, but the structure is front-loaded and the extra context is worthwhile.

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 complex, no-annotation tool, the description covers the operational contract comprehensively: what the plan produces, how caps affect allocation, what the user must sign and fund, the cost model, and where the authoritative schema lives. Nothing critical for correct invocation 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% and each property already documents defaults, ranges, and aliases. The description adds context about candidate pools, capital, and caps but mostly mirrors the schema and repeats its example, so it does not substantially enrich parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('Plan a hire of the ChainHelix yieldopt agent'), names the exact resource (ERC-8004 #269226, Yield allocation across pools), and describes the concrete output (allocation per pool, blended APY, unallocated capital). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like hire_plan_gridtrader and hire_plan_rebalancer.

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 this is appropriate: planning a hire before funding/execution, with 'no custody, no execution' and a free planning call versus a paid job. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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

All 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?