Merkl MCP Server

Retrieve Multiple Opportunities

opportunities-search

Search and filter Merkl opportunities by chain, token, status, APR, TVL, type, or campaign criteria to find matching yield and reward campaigns.

Instructions

This endpoint enables you to search for opportunities by providing specific criteria through query parameters.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No	Filter by name
`page`	No	0-indexed page number
`sort`	No	Sort by apr, tvl, rewards or last campaign creation date
`test`	No	Include opportunities with test campaigns
`type`	No	A comma separated list of Opportunity type
`items`	No	Number of items returned by page (1-100). Default: 20
`order`	No	asc to sort ascending, desc to sort descending	desc
`point`	No	Include opportunities with point campaigns
`action`	No	A comma separated list actions. Legal values: POOL,HOLD,DROP,LEND,BORROW,LONG,SHORT,SWAP,INVALID
`search`	No	Search amongst multiple values (token, protocols, tags, campaigns)
`status`	No	A comma separated list of status. Legal values: LIVE,PAST,SOON
`tokens`	No	A comma separated list of token symbol. Use to filter by token
`chainId`	No	A comma separated list of chain ids. Example: ?chainId=1,42161
`campaigns`	No	Include campaign data. Will slow down the request
`chainName`	No	A comma separated list of chain names. Example: ?chainName=ethereum,arbitrum
`campaignId`	No	Search the opportunity linked to a given campaignId
`identifier`	No	Filter by identifier (mainParameter)
`maximumApr`	No	Maximum APR threshold
`maximumTvl`	No	Maximum TVL threshold in USD
`minimumApr`	No	Minimum APR threshold
`minimumTvl`	No	Minimum TVL threshold in USD
`tokenTypes`	No	Filter by token type. Use POINT to include point campaigns and PRETGE to include preTGE campaigns.
`creatorSlug`	No
`programSlugs`	No	A comma separated list of program ids or slugs. See GET /v4/programs
`creatorAddress`	No	Filter by creator address
`mainProtocolId`	No	A comma separated list of protocol ids. See GET /v4/protocols
`distributionTypes`	No	Filter by distribution type. Legal values: FIX_REWARD, MAX_REWARD, DUTCH_AUCTION
`rewardTokenSymbol`	No	Filter by opportunity with at least 1 campaign where the reward token has this symbol
`excludeSubCampaigns`	No	Exclude sub-campaigns from the results
`excludeEndedCampaigns`	No	Exclude ended campaigns from the results

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`results`	Yes	List of opportunities

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.9Sep 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the mechanism of 'query parameters' — no pagination behavior, result-size caveats, read-only nature, or performance notes (e.g. campaigns=true slowing the request, which the schema mentions but the description does not reinforce).

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, so it is not bloated. However, it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise — brevity here comes from saying almost nothing.

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 30-parameter search endpoint with filtering, sorting, and pagination semantics, the description should at least orient the agent on the query model. An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but the generic sentence leaves the tool's core behavior and its relationship to sibling search/aggregate/count tools unexplained.

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 97% across 30 parameters, so the schema already documents filters, enums, defaults, and comma-separated list formats. The description adds nothing on top of that, which is the expected baseline of 3 when structured data does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a recognizable verb+resource ('search for opportunities') but is otherwise generic boilerplate ('This endpoint enables you to...'). It does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as opportunities-get, opportunities-count, or opportunities-aggregate, which an agent must choose between.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of any alternative tool. The only hint is 'by providing specific criteria,' which the schema already implies. An agent gets no help deciding between this and opportunities-count/aggregate/get.

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

Deploy Server