SoFinance

List same-stock pools

list_rwa_pairs

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the same-stock Solana pools on the SoFinance pools page (https://sofinancelab.xyz/app/rwa-pairs): Raydium CLMM and Meteora DLMM pools where both sides are the same stock from two issuers (e.g. TSLA/TSLAx, SPCX/SPCXx), plus the USDC/USDT pool. Served from the site's saved pools snapshot, the same list the page shows. Each pool has protocol, symbols, fee tier, TVL, 24h volume, apr7d (the highest 7-day range fee APR estimate and which of the 4 range presets it comes from: Micro, Tight, Standard, Wide), and an openPositionUrl. Filter with symbol (e.g. "TSLA"). Default order: 7-day APR, high to low. estimatedFeeAprPct / estimatedFeeAprLabel are the older pool-level 24-hour figure (last 24h fees / TVL, annualized), not a 7-day estimate; small pools can show very large values, and a pool without a 7-day estimate carries a warning. Estimates from past trading, not a promise of future fees. Fees not guaranteed. For the 4 presets of one pool call get_pool_range_apr. No wallet or token needed. Opening a position through MCP (quote_open_position / prepare_open_position) is Raydium CLMM only and needs a wallet token; Meteora pools open on the website.

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": "list_rwa_pairs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`minTvl`	No	Minimum pool TVL in USD (default 0)
`sortBy`	No	Sort key (default apr7d, the 7-day estimate the site ranks by). estimatedFeeApr is the older pool-level 24h figure.	apr7d
`symbol`	No	Optional ticker filter, e.g. TSLA or TSLAx (case-insensitive; matches either token or the base ticker)
`maxPages`	No	Deprecated, ignored: the list comes from the saved snapshot.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), yet the description still adds substantial behavior: the data comes from a saved snapshot rather than a live query, the default ordering, what a missing 7-day estimate looks like (a warning), and repeated disclaimers that estimates derive from past trading. It also discloses the deprecated-and-ignored maxPages behavior, which no annotation conveys.

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?

Front-loaded with scope and inclusion criteria, then field inventory, then caveats — a sensible order. Slightly padded by near-duplicate disclaimers ('Estimates from past trading, not a promise of future fees. Fees not guaranteed.') and by an inline URL, but no sentence is truly off-topic.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-shape burden and does so by enumerating every field (protocol, symbols, fee tier, TVL, 24h volume, apr7d with the four range presets, openPositionUrl). Combined with the snapshot provenance note and filter/sort defaults, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this tool.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it restates the default sort as '7-day APR, high to low', gives a concrete symbol filter example, and explains that estimatedFeeAprPct/estimatedFeeAprLabel are the older pool-level 24-hour annualized figure distinct from apr7d. That distinction is the main ambiguity an agent would otherwise hit.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (same-stock Solana pools on SoFinance), defines the exact inclusion criteria (Raydium CLMM / Meteora DLMM where both sides are the same stock from two issuers, plus USDC/USDT), and gives concrete examples (TSLA/TSLAx, SPCX/SPCXx). An agent can distinguish this listing tool from get_pool_range_apr and the position tools without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'For the 4 presets of one pool call get_pool_range_apr', and clarifies prerequisites ('No wallet or token needed') plus the constraint that MCP-side position opening is Raydium CLMM only while Meteora pools open on the website. It stops short of a full when-not-to-use statement against the position/quote siblings, but the context is clear.

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

All SoFinance tools Inspect

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

Need Help?