Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Algorand MCP

Algorand MCP

by GoPlausible
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

api_tinyman_get_pool_creation_quote

Calculate costs and parameters for establishing a Tinyman liquidity pool on the Algorand blockchain, specifying assets and creator address.

Instructions

Get quote for creating a new Tinyman pool

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "asset1Id": "<asset1Id>",
      "asset2Id": "<asset2Id>",
      "initiatorAddr": "<initiatorAddr>"
    },
    "name": "api_tinyman_get_pool_creation_quote"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
asset1IdYesID of the first asset
asset2IdYesID of the second asset
initiatorAddrYesAddress of the account creating the pool
versionNoTinyman protocol versionv2
networkNoAlgorand network to use (default: mainnet)
itemsPerPageNoNumber of items per page for paginated responses (default: 10)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv4.1.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is a 'Get quote' operation, implying it's likely read-only and non-destructive, but doesn't confirm this or mention any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what the quote output contains. The description is minimal and leaves key behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with a clear, focused function and is front-loaded with the essential information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 6 parameters (including required ones) and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the quote output contains, how it should be used, or any behavioral context. Given the complexity of pool creation in DeFi and the lack of annotations, more guidance is needed to make this tool usable for an AI agent.

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 schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain relationships between asset IDs or the significance of the initiator address). This meets the baseline expectation when schema coverage is complete.

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 the action ('Get quote') and resource ('for creating a new Tinyman pool'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'api_tinyman_get_swap_quote' or 'api_tinyman_get_liquidity_quote', which are also quote-related tools in the same domain.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or typical use cases. It doesn't mention that this is for pool creation quotes specifically (as opposed to swap or liquidity quotes), nor does it reference related tools like 'api_tinyman_get_pool' for existing pools.

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