Skip to main content
Glama
FTHTrading

Genesis402

by FTHTrading
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Ranked DeFi yield opportunities from 15,000+ pools, filterab

genesis402_defi_yields

Find and compare DeFi yields across 15,000+ pools, filterable by chain, protocol, token, stablecoin-only, or minimum TVL. Get ranked APY and TVL details to identify the best yield for any asset.

Instructions

Paid (price from the live 402 quote). Ranked DeFi yield opportunities from 15,000+ pools, filterable by chain, protocol, token, stablecoin-only and minimum TVL. Use to answer 'where is the best yield for X'. Returns up to limit pools with protocol, chain, token, APY and TVL, plus sources and an evidence hash. APYs are variable and backward-looking; not investment advice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoSort order: 'apy' (highest yield first) or 'tvl' (largest pool first).
chainNoFilter to one chain by name, e.g. Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum. Omit for all chains.
limitNoHow many pools to return, 1 to 100.
tokenNoFilter to pools containing this token symbol, e.g. USDC, ETH, WBTC. Case-insensitive.
projectNoFilter to one protocol by its slug, e.g. aave-v3. Omit for all protocols.
min_tvl_usdNoMinimum pool TVL in USD, e.g. 1000000 to skip small pools.
stablecoin_onlyNotrue = only stablecoin pools.
payment_signatureNoOptional. An x402 v2 payment you signed for this call's quote (the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value). Omit to get the price quote first; nothing is charged without it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv0.3.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / chain / description
      Added value: +"Filter to one chain by name, e.g. Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum. Omit for all chains."
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Added value: +"How many pools to return, 1 to 100."
    • addedInput schema / properties / min_tvl_usd / description
      Added value: +"Minimum pool TVL in USD, e.g. 1000000 to skip small pools."
    • changedInput schema / properties / payment_signature / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. An x402 v2 payment you signed for this call's quote (the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value). Omit to get the price quote first."New value: +"Optional. An x402 v2 payment you signed for this call's quote (the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header value). Omit to get the price quote first; nothing is charged without it."
    • addedInput schema / properties / project / description
      Added value: +"Filter to one protocol by its slug, e.g. aave-v3. Omit for all protocols."
    • addedInput schema / properties / sort / description
      Added value: +"Sort order: 'apy' (highest yield first) or 'tvl' (largest pool first)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / stablecoin_only / description
      Added value: +"true = only stablecoin pools."
    • addedInput schema / properties / token / description
      Added value: +"Filter to pools containing this token symbol, e.g. USDC, ETH, WBTC. Case-insensitive."
  2. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true), the description discloses that the call is paid, requires a signed payment signature to actually charge, and describes the return payload (protocol, chain, token, APY, TVL, sources, evidence hash). It also adds a caveat that APYs are variable and not investment advice. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is four sentences, front-loading the paid nature and then the core function, usage, return fields, and a caveat. Every sentence carries unique information with no fluff or repetition.

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 an 8-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the return fields, the payment requirement, and the intended use. The only missing piece is a note on error handling or rate limits, but given the schema covers parameter formats and the payment flow, it is adequately complete for correct invocation.

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% with clear descriptions for all 8 parameters. The description reiterates some filters ('chain, protocol, token, stablecoin-only and minimum TVL') and ties them to the use case, but adds no new semantics beyond what the schema already provides. It does not compensate for the payment_signature parameter beyond the schema's own explanation.

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 states a specific verb ('Returns ranked DeFi yield opportunities') with a clear resource ('from 15,000+ pools') and enumerates filters. The phrase 'Use to answer where is the best yield for X' gives an unambiguous use case, distinguishing it from other tools in the suite that handle receipts, calls, or scans.

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?

It provides a direct usage instruction ('Use to answer...') and clarifies the paid nature with a two-step payment flow. However, it does not mention when not to use it or explicitly name alternative tools, leaving some ambiguity for an agent deciding between this and other genesis402 tools.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools