DeFi yield pools from DefiLlama, normalized and filterable by chain, project, symbol, stablecoin and min TVL; refreshed every 5 minutes. Price $0.02 per call, paid with USDC over x402.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| chain | No | chain name, e.g. base, ethereum, solana | |
| limit | No | ||
| symbol | No | ||
| project | No | DefiLlama project slug, e.g. aave-v3 | |
| stablecoin | No | ||
| min_tvl_usd | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It adds useful context such as data source, normalization, 5-minute refresh, and per-call cost, but it does not disclose output ordering, default limits, pagination, or rate limits. It is helpful but not complete.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is compact and information-dense, with no filler. The first sentence delivers the core purpose and filters, while the second adds important operational details about freshness and cost. Every clause earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain what the agent gets back and how calling behavior works. It does not mention result fields, ordering, default limits, pagination, or what a zero-filter call returns. For a six-parameter data tool, this is a notable gap.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is only 33%, so the description must compensate. It does explain five of the six filters conceptually (chain, project, symbol, stablecoin, min TVL) but omits 'limit' and leaves the stablecoin boolean semantics ambiguous. It adds meaning beyond the schema for some params but not all.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly identifies the resource (DeFi yield pools from DefiLlama) and the key capabilities: normalization and filtering by chain, project, symbol, stablecoin, and min TVL. However, there is no explicit verb like 'get' or 'list', and it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool defi_protocol.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage through filterable fields but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus defi_protocol or the scrape tools. There are no stated alternatives, exclusions, or conditions that would help an agent route between siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The set splits into three clear domains, but within scraping and yields there are tiered duplicates: scrape_markdown/scrape_summary and defi_yields/yield_report overlap in output, with the latter being supersets. Descriptions clarify the differences, but an agent could still pick the wrong tier.
All tools use lowercase snake_case with descriptive, domain-prefixed names, so the convention is predictable. The only inconsistency is that scrape_* tools are verb-led while defi_* and yield_report are noun phrases, but this is a minor stylistic deviation.
Six tools is a reasonable, well-scoped set for a paid data-access server, covering fact-checking, DeFi data, and web scraping without bloat. The tiered duplicates add some redundancy but each has a distinct price/output level.
For the three apparent subdomains, the core workflows are covered: claims are checkable, DeFi protocols and yields are queryable, and pages can be scraped with or without summarization. Minor gaps exist, such as no DefiLlama protocol search by name and no batch/multi-URL operations, but agents can work around these.