Skip to main content
Glama

buy_yields_token_weth

Paid. Where to earn yield on WETH: live pools holding WETH across protocols and chains, APY and TVL (DefiLlama data). $0.01 USDC on Base or Solana. No account, no API key. Failed calls not charged. URL https://southpow.media/v1/yields/token/weth.

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": "buy_yields_token_weth"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNotvl (default) or apy
limitNoRows, 1-100 (default 20)
min_tvl_usdNoMinimum pool TVL in USD (default 100000)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the $0.01 USDC price, accepted payment chains (Base/Solana), no account or API key required, and that failed calls are not charged. It omits rate limits and anything about pagination or response shape.

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?

Front-loads 'Paid.', then purpose, then pricing and access terms in short fragments. Every sentence carries a distinct fact (data source, cost, payment chain, no auth, refund policy) with no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must convey what comes back, and it does (pools with APY and TVL across protocols and chains). The endpoint URL is a nice extra; only the sort/limit behavior beyond the schema and any result-cap behavior are unaddressed.

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% and each of sort, limit, and min_tvl_usd already has a description, so the text adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description names the resource precisely ('live pools holding WETH across protocols and chains') and the data returned (APY, TVL, DefiLlama source), which distinguishes it from the buy_yields_token_* siblings by ticker. It stops short of a clean verb+scope statement and never explicitly contrasts itself with the protocol_ or chain_ variants.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'where to earn yield on WETH' — an agent can infer the WETH-token lens, but there is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over buy_yields_token_eth, buy_yields_protocol_*, or buy_yields_chain_*.

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.

Resources