Skip to main content
Glama

Defillama

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Defi Protocol Detail

defi_protocol_detail
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get detailed metrics for a specific DeFi protocol including TVL history over time, breakdown by blockchain, and token information.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
protocolYesProtocol slug (e.g., "aave", "uniswap", "lido", "makerdao")

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoOfficial protocol URL
mcapNoMarket capitalization in USD
nameYesProtocol name
slugYesProtocol slug identifier
chainNoPrimary blockchain
chainsYesList of supported chains
symbolNoToken symbol
categoryNoProtocol category
chain_tvlsNoTVL breakdown by blockchain
current_tvlNoCurrent total value locked in USD
descriptionNoProtocol description
tvl_history_last_30YesLast 30 days of TVL history

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "category": {
+      "description": "Protocol category",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "chain": {
+      "description": "Primary blockchain",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "chain_tvls": {
+      "additionalProperties": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "description": "TVL breakdown by blockchain",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "chains": {
+      "description": "List of supported chains",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "current_tvl": {
+      "description": "Current total value locked in USD",
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "description": {
+      "description": "Protocol description",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "mcap": {
+      "description": "Market capitalization in USD",
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "description": "Protocol name",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "slug": {
+      "description": "Protocol slug identifier",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "symbol": {
+      "description": "Token symbol",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "tvl_history_last_30": {
+      "description": "Last 30 days of TVL history",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "date": {
+            "description": "ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD)",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "tvl": {
+            "description": "TVL value in USD",
+            "type": "number"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "date",
+          "tvl"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "description": "Official protocol URL",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "name",
+    "slug",
+    "chains",
+    "tvl_history_last_30"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "protocol": "aave"
+  },
+  {
+    "protocol": "uniswap"
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) already indicate safety. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the returned data categories (TVL history, blockchain breakdown, token info), which goes beyond the annotations.

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?

Single sentence, no extraneous words, front-loads the main purpose. Every word earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values. The description covers all relevant aspects: it's a single-protocol query returning specific data types. No gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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% (1 parameter with example values). The description does not add further details about the 'protocol' parameter, relying solely on the schema description. No additional semantics provided.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed metrics for a specific DeFi protocol'), and lists concrete data types (TVL history, breakdown by blockchain, token information). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like defi_tvl_protocols or defi_protocol_fees.

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 explicitly states the tool is for a single protocol and shows examples like 'aave', 'uniswap'. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the sibling context suggests alternatives for chain-level or fee-focused queries. Could include an exclusion for multi-protocol comparison.

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

All Defillama toolsInspect
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