Armor Crypto MCP

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

stake_quote

Obtain a quote for staking tokens into a liquid staking derivative. Provide the input amount, source wallet, and target output token mint address.

Instructions

Retrieve a stake quote.

Expects a StakeQuoteRequestContainer, returns a SwapQuoteRequestContainer.

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": {
      "stake_quote_requests": "<stake_quote_requests>"
    },
    "name": "stake_quote"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`stake_quote_requests`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`swap_quote_requests`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 18, 2025

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. The description lacks disclosure of behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or rate limits. Only input/output types are mentioned.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, but includes redundant type names (e.g., 'StakeQuoteRequestContainer' and 'SwapQuoteRequestContainer'). Could be more concise while retaining clarity.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The output schema exists, so return values don't need elaboration. However, missing usage context and behavioral details leaves gaps for an agent to properly invoke the tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds no parameter details. It only references the request container without explaining individual fields, missing the opportunity to clarify parameter meaning.

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 'Retrieve a stake quote,' specifying a verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like swap_quote and unstake_quote by name, but does not explicitly differentiate behavior.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., vs swap_quote or unstake_quote). No mentions of prerequisites or context.

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