Spectra MCP Server

MetaVault MCP

Multi-protocol yield intelligence for AI agents — covering Spectra Finance, Pendle, and Morpho via the Model Context Protocol.

55 tools · 3 protocols · 10+ chains · read-only · open emergence architecture · calibration intelligence · on-chain Curve quoting · Pendle logit AMM modeling · ERC-4626 health checks · yield curve term structure · historical eth_getLogs · full Pendle protocol parity (15 tools) · cross-protocol position map · cross-protocol Spectra↔Pendle comparison · veSPECTRA + vePENDLE governance · Pendle historical time-series · Morpho supply-side visibility with supplier cascade modeling · Morpho user positions & historical rates · Merkl campaign APR + expiry integration · entry path awareness · prescriptive observation boundaries · curator risk monitoring · withdrawal stress testing · rollover planning · multi-vault portfolio aggregation · pool expiry monitoring · zero web3 library dependencies

What This Does

Any AI agent (Claude, GPT, open-source) that supports MCP can query Spectra, Pendle, and Morpho in a unified interface to:

• Discover the best fixed-rate yield opportunities across 10 chains simultaneously
• Analyze specific PT/YT positions with full data (APY, TVL, liquidity, prices)
• Calculate leveraged looping strategies (Spectra PT + Morpho collateral) with auto-detected borrow rates
• Compare fixed vs. variable yields to make informed decisions
• Track wallet portfolios across all Spectra positions (PT, YT, LP) with Merkl reward integration for complete PnL
• Surface external Merkl campaign APR alongside pool and market data for both Spectra and Pendle
• Monitor pool trading volume, individual transaction activity, and cross-pool address scanning
• Quote PT trades with on-chain Curve get_dy() for exact output, falling back to math estimates
• Simulate portfolio state after a hypothetical trade (BEFORE / TRADE / AFTER with deltas)
• Scan all chains for capital-aware opportunities with price impact, effective APY, and Morpho looping analysis
• Detect YT arbitrage opportunities where IBT APR diverges from YT implied rate
• Compute real veSPECTRA boost multipliers per-pool using live on-chain data from Base, and vePENDLE voting power from Ethereum mainnet (with sPENDLE transition awareness)
• Map your full cross-protocol position in one call — Spectra + Pendle + Morpho + governance (veSPECTRA + vePENDLE), with contradiction detection (unused boost, lending vs fixed rate spreads, concentration, looper detection, expiring positions across protocols)
• Assess entry path complexity — automatically flags exotic underlyings, sw-wrapper hops, and mainnet gas friction so agents know the real cost of reaching advertised yields
• Discover live MetaVaults across all chains — curator info, TVL, APY, positions, epoch history
• Model MetaVault "double loop" strategies for curators — vault compounding + Morpho leverage with curator economics, auto-populated from live API data or manual parameters
• Monitor MetaVault operational health — curator dashboard with vault allocation per position, depositor flows, fee revenue, bridge activity, and actionable alerts
• Query Morpho lending markets for PT collateral opportunities, identify who supplies the lending liquidity, and discover vault allocations across markets
• Query protocol stats, tokenomics, and governance data
• Compare Spectra vs Pendle yield opportunities side-by-side with maturity-aware matching on overlapping chains
• Scan both Spectra and Pendle for the best curator opportunities with capital-aware sizing and cross-protocol match tagging
• Browse Pendle markets across all Pendle-supported chains (including Pendle-only chains like Mantle, Berachain, HyperEVM, Corn)
• Analyze Pendle markets in full depth — market details, portfolio tracking, trade quoting, trade simulation, looping strategies, YT arbitrage, expiry monitoring, yield curves, capacity analysis, and protocol-wide stats (full parity with Spectra tools)
• Assess pool depth with multi-size capacity curves — quote PT trades at geometric capital tiers ($1K→$1M) to find the sweet spot and exhaustion point on both Spectra and Pendle
• Verify IBT health before deploying — on-chain ERC-4626 conversion rate, APR sustainability (organic vs incentive), pool balance, protocol recognition, liquidity
• Visualize yield curves (term structure) for any underlying across all chains — all maturities sorted chronologically with curve shape analysis
• Recover historical on-chain pool activity via eth_getLogs when API data has aged out — with dynamic RPC URL support for any chain
• Monitor curator Morpho position health — liquidation distance, borrow rate drift, health factors across all chains
• Stress-test MetaVault withdrawal scenarios — liquidity waterfall analysis (idle → maturing → LP removal → PT sale) with market stress simulation
• Plan position rollovers for expiring MetaVault positions — cross-protocol candidate ranking with entry impact, yield gap, and overlap windows
• Aggregate multi-vault curator portfolios — total AUM, blended APY, fee revenue projection, concentration analysis by underlying/chain
• Monitor pool expiry across all chains with readiness assessment — successor pool detection, gauge status from governance API, and operator checklist (deploy pool / submit gauge / ready for migration)
• Learn protocol mechanics on-demand via mv_get_protocol_context (PT/YT identity, Router batching, deposit paths, glossary, fees & costs, workflow routing, externalPositions registry)
• Surface protocol YT fees (Spectra 3%, Pendle 5%) and Merkl campaign eligibility (POOL vs HOLD) directly in tool output so agents apply them without external lookups

The agent doesn't need to understand PT/YT mechanics -- it just calls spectra_scan_opportunities or pendle_scan_opportunities with its capital size and gets ranked, actionable data. For cross-protocol comparison, mv_scan_curator_opportunities ranks both protocols together. If it needs to understand *why* something works that way, it calls mv_get_protocol_context.

Open Emergence Architecture

The server is designed so that AI agents can discover novel strategies without being taught specific strategies. Instead of hard-coding strategy identification logic, the system teaches protocol mechanics at three layers — and lets the agent compose building blocks into its own analysis.

The Three Layers

Layer 1: Protocol Context (mv_get_protocol_context tool + resources)

→ Teaches the "physics" of the protocol: PT/YT identity, Router batching, minting → Available as a callable tool (on-demand) and as MCP resources → Static knowledge — what CAN happen, not what IS happening

Layer 2: Tool Descriptions (every tool's description string) → Teaches domain-specific mechanics relevant to that tool's data → Cross-reference nudges: "use spectra_get_portfolio to check actual holdings" → Uses "could be" language, not "is" — preserves ambiguity where it exists → Calls out hidden mechanics that could mislead (e.g., AMM_ADD_LIQUIDITY can mint YT)

Layer 3: Structured Output Hints (computed at runtime in tool output) → Position Shape analysis in portfolio: balance ratios (e.g., "YT/PT 4:1") → Portfolio Signals: concentration, maturity alerts, strategy shape across positions → Volume Signals: volume/liquidity ratio, buy/sell skew, trend detection → Morpho Market Hints: capacity warnings, utilization alerts, spread analysis, reward incentives → Morpho Supply-Side Analysis: supplier identification (vault/EOA/looper), concentration metrics, supply gap warnings — surfaces where lending liquidity comes from and whether it's sufficient → Competing Interpretation Branches (A/B/C) in activity analysis per-address: multiple explanations for the same observable pattern, presented with equal weight. The agent must bring external evidence to collapse branches — the tension IS the info. → Statistical confidence boundaries: small-N cycle repetitions (≤5) flagged as insufficient for extrapolation, preventing false pattern-matching → Flow Accounting with competing hypotheses: YT-only, PT-only, fully exited positions each get multiple explanations that predict different future behavior → Address isolation mode: cycle detection, flow accounting, contract/EOA detection, pool impact warnings, gas estimates, pool context → Capital-aware warnings: short maturity, low liquidity, negative effective APY → Yield Dimensions in scan output: fixed, variable, LP, looping side-by-side → Strategy Tension: competing PT looping vs YT accumulation on same pool → On-chain quote source indicators: "(on-chain Curve get_dy)" vs "(estimated)" → Yield composition: IBT APR breakdown (organic base vs external incentives) in scans and quotes → Incentive sustainability: flags when >50% of IBT APR or LP APY comes from incentives, shows "organic only" APY so agents can assess yield durability without incentive assumptions → Pool reserves: IBT/PT amounts with ratio for AMM imbalance analysis → Merkl campaign APR: external incentive programs (e.g., KAT rewards) shown per-pool/market with double-counting avoidance (skips campaigns whose reward tokens are already displayed) → Merkl campaign eligibility: action type (POOL/HOLD) always shown, with explicit "[LP only — not for YT/PT holders]" flag on POOL campaigns to prevent misattribution → Protocol YT fees: Spectra 3% and Pendle 5% shown in every pool/market detail output so agents apply them to yield calculations without needing external lookups → Points multipliers: external programs (Drops, InfiniFi, Firelight) with amounts → "Could be" / "at current rates" language: preserves ambiguity in ranked output → Makes key signals SALIENT without prescribing interpretation

Layer 4: Observation Coverage (quantifies blind spots in tool output) → Value coverage: what % of an address's position is explained by observable activity. Low coverage means most behavior is invisible (direct mints, transfers, cross-chain). → Temporal coverage: active days vs dark periods with no observable events. Longest gap duration surfaced so the agent can reason about invisible activity. → Data source coverage: which of 5 available sources were consulted vs not. Explicitly lists what is invisible to the current analysis. → Activity diversity: single-type activity flagged as highest-ambiguity pattern. → Boundary marker: "Position sizing should assume this analysis is incomplete, not comprehensive." — a structural admission of domain-of-validity limits. → Coverage metrics bound ALL interpretations above them. High-confidence strategy assessment + low observation coverage = false confidence. The coverage section forces the agent to size its conviction to what it actually observed.

Design Principles

• Teach mechanics, not conclusions. The server explains that AMM_ADD_LIQUIDITY *could be* a mint+LP batch operation — it doesn't conclude "this user is accumulating YT."
• Present competing interpretations, not single narratives. Activity analysis outputs multiple interpretation branches (A/B/C) that predict different future behavior. The agent must bring external evidence to collapse them. This friction surface prevents premature pattern-matching — the most common failure mode in wallet strategy analysis.
• Flag statistical insufficiency. Small repetition counts (≤5 cycle detections) are explicitly flagged as insufficient for extrapolation. The agent cannot treat N=3 as a confirmed pattern.
• Every tool cross-references at least one other tool. This creates analytical workflows without dictating them. The agent learns to chec