SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

Compound v3 market stats on Ethereum read on-chain

crypto_compound_market_stats

Read-only

Compound v3 (Comet) market stats on Ethereum read on-chain: utilization, supply and borrow APY, total supply and borrow of the base asset, and every collateral asset with its borrow and liquidation collateral factors, liquidation factor and supply cap. Markets: usdc (cUSDCv3) or weth (cWETHv3). Related tools on this server, for a different need: crypto_bitcoin_mempool_stats when you need Bitcoin mempool congestion from mempool.space: unconfirmed; crypto_coingecko_market_depth when you need CoinGecko per-exchange market depth for one coin: USD cost. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

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": "crypto_compound_market_stats"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`market`	No	usdc (default) or weth

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`comet`	No
`label`	No
`market`	No
`source`	No
`baseToken`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`baseDecimals`	No
`borrowApyPct`	No
`supplyApyPct`	No
`utilizationPct`	No
`totalBorrowBase`	No
`totalSupplyBase`	No
`collateralAssets`	No
`collateralAssetCount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description adds something the annotations do not: a per-call cost model ('$0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 on Base, Solana or Arc; failed calls are not charged'). That billing/auth behavior is material to invocation. It stops short of explaining data freshness or whether values are snapshotted per block.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

The core sentence is front-loaded and information-dense, and price/payment info is correctly placed at the end. But the 'Related tools on this server' clause reads like keyword padding — two sentences pointed at unrelated tools — and the long return-field enumeration partially duplicates the output schema.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need not be re-explained, and annotations plus the x402 pricing line cover safety and cost. What is missing for a paid on-chain read is operational context: freshness/block-snapshot semantics, and what happens on repeated calls vs cache. Adequate, but there is a real gap for a metered call.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single `market` parameter already documents 'usdc (default) or weth', so the baseline is 3. The description earns above baseline by mapping each value to its on-chain contract identifier (usdc → cUSDCv3, weth → cWETHv3), which helps an agent that has a contract address in hand and confirms both markets live on Ethereum.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: on-chain Compound v3 (Comet) market stats on Ethereum, and enumerates exactly what is returned (utilization, supply/borrow APY, base asset totals, collateral assets with borrow/liquidation factors and supply caps). The domain (Compound v3 Comet, Ethereum) plus allowed markets (usdc/cUSDCv3, weth/cWETHv3) makes it unmistakable against the many sibling crypto_* tools.

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?

It explicitly names two alternatives with conditions ('crypto_bitcoin_mempool_stats when you need Bitcoin mempool congestion', 'crypto_coingecko_market_depth when you need per-exchange market depth'), which is genuine routing guidance. However, neither is the dangerously similar neighbor — crypto_aave_lending_markets, crypto_defillama_yields, or finance_curve_finance_pools — so the agent gets no guidance on distinguishing this from the closest lending-rate siblings.

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

All SiteCheck Crypto & Finance 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?