Skip to main content
Glama

AgentFeed

by io.github.seekdaseek
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Protocol TVL

get_tvl
Read-onlyIdempotent

TVL for any DeFi protocol with 1d and 7d change, or a top-15 chains ranking. DefiLlama-backed; a protocol family is aggregated across its deployments and the change is TVL-weighted. Costs 0.005 USDC per call (x402, USDC on Solana or Base).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetNoprotocol slug/name e.g. jito, marinade — omit for top chains

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesthe get_tvl payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_tvl
toolYesthe tool that produced this payload

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": {},
+      "description": "the get_tvl payload; a real captured example is free at https://x402.ochinimus.app/api/sample/get_tvl",
+      "propertyNames": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "const": "get_tvl",
+      "description": "the tool that produced this payload",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "tool",
+    "data"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable context: data source (DefiLlama), aggregation method (protocol family across deployments, TVL-weighted change), and cost (0.005 USDC via x402 on Solana or Base). This goes beyond annotations and informs the agent of external dependencies and fees.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core functionality, then adds data source and cost. It is concise and each sentence earns its place. Slightly verbose due to the cost details, but still efficient.

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?

For a single-optional-parameter tool with an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description covers the essential functional aspects (purpose, source, aggregation, cost). It does not describe error handling or response format, but the output schema presumably covers the latter. It is adequately complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 the schema itself explains the target parameter with examples and the omit behavior. The description adds only a minor clarification ('or a top-15 chains ranking') which is already implied by the schema's 'omit for top chains'. No significant added meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool's function: retrieve TVL for a specific DeFi protocol with 1d and 7d changes, or a top-15 chains ranking. This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from the many get_* siblings, none of which are TVL-related.

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 implies when to use it (for TVL queries) and explicitly mentions the alternative of omitting the target for chains ranking. However, it does not name specific sibling tools or provide explicit exclusions. The context is clear enough for an agent to select it over other get_* tools.

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

All AgentFeed 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