Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Graph AAVE MCP

Graph AAVE MCP

by PaulieB14
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_aave_chains

List all AAVE-supported chains with their subgraph IDs, protocol version (V2/V3), chain name, 30-day query volume, and key entities. Use this to select a network or discover deployments.

Instructions

Use this when the user asks which AAVE chains are supported, wants to pick a network, or needs to discover available AAVE deployments. Returns all supported chains with their subgraph IDs, protocol version (V2/V3), chain name, 30-day query volume, and key entities. Chains: Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Polygon, Optimism, Avalanche, Fantom (V3 + V2 legacy), plus AAVE Governance V3. Always call this first if chain is ambiguous.

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_aave_chains"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It states output but does not mention read-only nature, data freshness, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral disclosure.

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?

Efficient single paragraph with no wasted words. Clearly states usage, output, and examples.

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?

For a no-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description fully covers what the agent needs: purpose, when to use, and what data is returned.

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?

No parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds value by detailing the return contents, which compensates for lack of param info.

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 explicitly states the tool is used to list supported AAVE chains and includes specific output details like subgraph IDs and protocol versions. It clearly distinguishes from siblings by being the go-to for chain discovery.

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?

Provides explicit context on when to use (user asks for supported chains, ambiguous chain) and advises to call first. Lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tools, but clear enough.

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