Skip to main content
Glama
tamago-labs

Tapp Exchange MCP Server

by tamago-labs
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript

tapp_collect_fee

Collect fees from a specific liquidity position within a pool on Tapp Exchange. Input pool ID and position address to manage earnings.

Instructions

Collect fees from a specific liquidity position in a given pool

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
poolIdYesThe address of the pool from which to collect fees
positionAddrYesThe address of the liquidity position

Implementation Reference

  • src/mcp/tapp/position-tools.ts:38-47 (handler)
    The handler function for the 'tapp_collect_fee' tool. It takes agent and input, calls agent.collectFee with poolId and positionAddr, and returns a success response with the transaction result.
    handler: async (agent: TappAgent, input: Record<string, any>) => {
    const result = await agent.collectFee({
        poolId: input.poolId,
        positionAddr: input.positionAddr
    });
    return {
        status: "success",
        transaction: result
    };
},
  • src/mcp/tapp/position-tools.ts:34-37 (schema)
    Input schema using Zod for the 'tapp_collect_fee' tool, defining required string parameters poolId and positionAddr.
    schema: {
    poolId: z.string().describe("The address of the pool from which to collect fees"),
    positionAddr: z.string().describe("The address of the liquidity position")
},
  • src/mcp/index.ts:57-57 (registration)
    Registration of the CollectFeeTool into the TappExchangeMcpTools object, which aggregates all MCP tools.
    "CollectFeeTool": CollectFeeTool

Tool Definition Quality

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('collect fees') which implies a transaction/mutation, but doesn't disclose critical traits like whether this requires gas fees, changes on-chain state, has rate limits, returns collected amounts, or handles errors. The description is minimal and leaves key behavioral aspects unspecified.

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 single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core action, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity of a DeFi fee collection operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'collecting fees' entails operationally, what happens after collection, error conditions, or return values. For a financial transaction tool, this leaves too many contextual gaps.

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 100%, with clear descriptions for both parameters (poolId as 'address of the pool', positionAddr as 'address of the liquidity position'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 the action ('collect fees') and target ('from a specific liquidity position in a given pool'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on adding/removing liquidity, creating pools, or swapping. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other fee-related tools (none exist in siblings), so it's not a perfect 5.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing position with accrued fees), exclusions, or how it relates to sibling tools like tapp_get_positions for checking fee status. Usage is implied but not explicitly stated.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/tamago-labs/tapp-exchange-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server