feegate-yield-mcp

get_pools

Fetch DeFi yield pools ranked by TVL and filter by chain, minimum TVL, or stablecoin-only to compare APY, TVL, and IL risk.

Instructions

Get top DeFi yield pools ranked by TVL, filtered by chain. Returns APY (total / base / reward), TVL, stablecoin flag and IL risk for each pool. Data: DefiLlama, updated continuously, cached 5 min. Free, no API key.

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": "get_pools"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chain`	No	Chain name (case-insensitive), e.g. "Ethereum", "Base", "Solana". Omit to search all chains.
`limit`	No	Max pools to return (1-50, default 10).
`min_tvl`	No	Minimum TVL in USD (default 1000000 = $1M).
`stablecoin_only`	No	If true, only return stablecoin pools (lower risk).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses useful behavioral context beyond the schema: DefiLlama as the source, continuous updates, a 5-minute cache, free access with no API key, and the main return fields. Gaps remain around rate limits, error behavior, and pagination, but the description adds substantial context.

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?

Four compact sentences are front-loaded with the core action, then return fields, then data source and caching details. Every sentence earns its place by adding operational context. There is no redundant or filler wording.

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 moderate tool with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description explains the return values, data source, freshness, authentication expectations, and ranking/filtering behavior. The input schema covers parameter details, so the description need not repeat them. Completeness is strong, though optional filters and output limits are not further elaborated.

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%, so the baseline is 3 even without additional parameter detail in the description. The description reinforces chain filtering and mentions return fields, but it does not add syntax, defaults, or semantics beyond what the schema already documents. The schema does the heavy lifting for all four optional parameters.

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 clearly states a specific verb and resource: get top DeFi yield pools ranked by TVL, filtered by chain. It distinguishes the core operation from a chain-list or project-yield tool but does not explicitly name either sibling. The purpose is clear without opening the schema, though sibling differentiation is not explicit.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool through 'top DeFi yield pools ranked by TVL, filtered by chain,' and the schema explains omitting chain to search all chains. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as get_project_yields or list_chains, nor does it state when not to use this tool. Usage guidance is implied but not fully routed.

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

Deploy Server