Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mineryield-mcp

mineryield-mcp

by nadeaup
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

List miners

list_miners
Read-only

Ranks catalog ASIC miners by estimated daily profit for a solar, battery, and grid power setup, with optional solar, battery, ZIP, and electricity-cost inputs.

Instructions

GET /api/v1/miners — rank catalog ASICs by daily profit for a home or small-business solar+battery+grid setup (same model as the site calculator). Optional solarW (10000=10 kW), batteryCapacity (kWh), zipCode, elecCost, and powerSources override the API-key owner profile. Example: 10 kW array + 20 kWh battery → solarW=10000, batteryCapacity=20, powerSources={solar:true, battery:true, grid:true}; sort PROFIT/DAY. Includes Kadena/KDA, NexaPow/NEXA, XPHash/XP, SHA-256 QUAI, and NiceHash daily revenue when a rate exists. Figures are MinerYield model estimates from live market inputs: estimates only, not investment, financial, or tax advice, and not ROI guarantees. Results vary with network difficulty, coin price, power cost, and hardware performance. Do your own research.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
solarWNoHome/small-business solar array capacity in Watts (10000 = 10 kW). Used with Peak Sun Hours from zipCode. Solar generation is treated as free during the sun window; leftover watts can charge the battery.
zipCodeNo5-digit US ZIP for Peak Sun Hours. Defaults to the API-key owner profile, then a server default. Needed for a realistic solar-by-day estimate.
elecCostNoGrid electricity price in USD per kWh (0.15 = 15 cents). Applied only to leftover watts after solar and battery. There is no separate day/night rate: solar covers the sun window, grid covers the rest at this price. On list_miners this overrides the API-key owner profile.
powerSourcesNoWhich legs of the site calculator to use. solar=true uses solarW during Peak Sun Hours; battery=true uses leftover solar stored in batteryCapacity at night; grid=true keeps the miner running 24h on leftover grid kWh. solar=true + grid=true + battery=false is "solar by day, grid at night". If grid=false the miner only runs while solar or battery energy lasts (runtimeHours < 24).
batteryCapacityNoBattery storage in kWh (20 = 20 kWh). Only used when powerSources.battery is true (passing batteryCapacity without powerSources turns battery on). Excess daytime solar charges the battery; the battery covers night hours before grid.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/destructive/openWorld, so the bar is lower. Beyond them the description adds real context: parameters override the API-key owner profile, figures come from live market inputs and MinerYield model estimates, and results are not ROI guarantees. It stops short of describing result ordering fields or rate-limiting.

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?

The endpoint and ranking purpose are front-loaded and the parameter example is efficient, but the tail is padded with legal boilerplate ('Do your own research', 'not investment... advice') that consumes space without helping an agent invoke the tool correctly.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining the return value; it only says the list is ranked by PROFIT/DAY and names the coins/rate sources, without describing the record fields an agent will parse. Parameter semantics and the estimate caveats are well covered, but the response shape is left largely implicit.

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?

Schema coverage is already 100%, so baseline would be 3. The description still earns extra credit by translating values into a concrete example (solarW=10000, batteryCapacity=20, powerSources object) and by stating that these overrides take precedence over the API-key owner profile — precedence is not stated in every schema field.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('rank catalog ASICs by daily profit') plus the scenario it models (home/small-business solar+battery+grid), and calls out the coin coverage. It is distinguishable from list_catalog_miners and list_mrr_rates, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with calculate_profitability or get_rigs.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description names the scenario and provides a concrete worked example (10 kW + 20 kWh → solarW=10000, batteryCapacity=20, powerSources={...}), which implies when to reach for it. But there is no explicit when-not guidance or mention of the sibling alternatives (calculate_profitability, list_catalog_miners) that an agent must choose between.

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