Skip to main content
Glama

Staking / LST yields ($0.005)

staking_yields
Read-only

PAID $0.005 USDC. APY (7-day on-chain exchange-rate change), TVL and exchange rate for stETH, rETH, cbETH, weETH, sfrxETH, sUSDe, sUSDS and sDAI. Optional token filter.

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": "staking_yields"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenNoOptional symbol filter, e.g. rETH
api_keyNoOptional prepaid key (sk_scrapling_...) or catalog pass token (sdp_..., from pass_day/pass_month). Otherwise pay per call with x402 via _meta['x402/payment'].

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / api_key / description
      Previous value: -"Optional prepaid key (sk_scrapling_...). Otherwise pay per call with x402 via _meta['x402/payment']."New value: +"Optional prepaid key (sk_scrapling_...) or catalog pass token (sdp_..., from pass_day/pass_month). Otherwise pay per call with x402 via _meta['x402/payment']."
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnly=true and openWorld=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that: the exact price ($0.005 USDC), the methodology used to compute APY (7-day on-chain exchange-rate change), and the covered universe of tokens. It does not disclose refresh cadence, rate limits, or failure behavior on payment, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

Two short sentences with the cost front-loaded, then metric definitions, then the parameter note. No filler, nothing that could be cut without losing information.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the job of naming the returned fields (APY, TVL, exchange rate) and the token universe. Slightly incomplete on result shape per token and data freshness, and it leaves the payment/auth path entirely to the schema's api_key description.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description earns an extra point by enumerating the supported token symbols (stETH, rETH, cbETH, weETH, sfrxETH, sUSDe, sUSDS, sDAI), which tells the agent what values the filter actually accepts — information the schema's 'e.g. rETH' does not give.

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?

States a specific verb-less but precise resource: APY, TVL and exchange rate for a named list of staking/LST tokens, with the APY methodology (7-day on-chain exchange-rate change) spelled out. The 'PAID $0.005 USDC' prefix signals this is the paid tier versus the free_staking_yields sibling, but the description never explicitly contrasts the two, so an agent must infer the difference.

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?

The only usage guidance is 'Optional token filter,' implying you can call it bare for all tokens or narrow to one. There is no statement of when to choose this over free_staking_yields or lookup_yields, nor any prerequisite about needing an api_key or x402 payment before calling.

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.