SiteCheck Crypto & Finance

Curve Finance gauges on one chain: CRV emission APR range

crypto_curve_gauge_weights

Read-only

Curve Finance gauges on one chain (default Ethereum): CRV emission APR range, CRV inflation rate per second and working supply per gauge, with the pool name and addresses. Sorted by CRV APR, top 1 to 50. Relative gauge weights and bribe yields are not in this source and are not reported. Small pools can show very high APR. Related tools on this server, for a different need: finance_curve_finance_pools when you need Curve Finance pools on Ethereum: pool name, total USD value; crypto_btc_fee_curve when you need Bitcoin fee estimate curve in sat/vB across confirmation. 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_curve_gauge_weights"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	No	Curve blockchainId, e.g. ethereum, arbitrum (default ethereum)
`limit`	No	How many gauges, 1 to 50 (default 10)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`chain`	No
`gauges`	No
`source`	No
`checkedAt`	No
`gaugeCount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly and openWorld, and the description adds genuinely new behavior: default chain, sort order, cap of 50 rows, a data-quality caveat that small pools can show very high APR, and the billing model ($0.002 per successful call via x402, failed calls free). It stops short of noting data freshness/refresh cadence, which is the one behavioral trait an agent using APR figures would still want.

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?

Front-loaded with scope and metrics, then exclusions, then alternatives, then price — a sensible priority order. Slight redundancy in 'are not in this source and are not reported', and the pricing sentence is long, but nothing is genuinely wasteful.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with a full output schema, the description covers scope, metric set, sorting, limits, known interpretation pitfalls, sibling routing, and cost. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret it correctly 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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented with their defaults and ranges. The description restates the chain default and the 1-50 limit but adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb/resource pair (Curve Finance gauges on one chain) plus the exact metrics returned: CRV emission APR range, CRV inflation rate per second, working supply per gauge, pool name and addresses. It also names the sibling it is not (finance_curve_finance_pools) and contrasts the payload, so an agent can choose without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit when-not conditions (relative gauge weights and bribe yields are not in this source) and routes to two named alternatives with the condition that selects each. Coverage of both positive and negative use cases is complete.

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?