Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@blockchainacademics/mcp

@blockchainacademics/mcp

Official
by blockchainacademics
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_aggregators

Fetch DEX, bridge, or yield aggregators ranked by volume, fees, and chain support. Specify the aggregator kind to get relevant results.

Instructions

DEX, bridge, or yield aggregators ranked by volume, fees, chain support. Required: kind ∈ {dex, bridge, yield}.

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": {
      "kind": "<kind>"
    },
    "name": "list_aggregators"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYesRequired. Aggregator kind: dex|bridge|yield.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden; it reveals ranking criteria but omits output structure, pagination, or rate limits, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 focused two-sentence structure with no wasted words, front-loading the core purpose and required parameter.

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?

Given the simple schema and lack of output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's function and ranking criteria, though output details could be clearer.

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%; the description repeats the allowed values but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states it lists DEX, bridge, or yield aggregators ranked by volume, fees, and chain support, which distinguishes it from other list tools among siblings.

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 specifies the required 'kind' parameter with valid values, providing clear context for when to use the tool, though no explicit exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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