Skip to main content
Glama

SAP MCP Server

by ai.oobeprotocol.sap.mcp

Register SAP Agent (Raw SDK Deprecated)

sap_register_agent

Deprecated raw SDK wrapper. Production registration must use sap_payments_register_agent so the local signer path confirms the account, verifies the 0.1 SOL protocol treasury fee invariant, and returns protocolComplete. Hosted accountless SAP MCP rejects this direct write before x402 payment. SAP MCP context: Do not use this raw SDK wrapper for production registration. The canonical registration path is sap_payments_register_agent, because it confirms the account, audits the protocol treasury fee, and fails closed when protocolComplete is false. Hosted accountless SAP MCP rejects direct registration before x402 payment because OOBE never custodies user wallet keys. Use sap_agent_identity_plan first, then sap_payments_register_agent with confirm:true.

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: local-signer write workflow. Pricing: paid value-action; preview cost and transaction effects before user confirmation. Routing: hosted accountless write is blocked; do not call this as a paid hosted write and no x402 payment should be charged. Use sap_payments_register_agent when user signing is required. Signer boundary: user-controlled local profile or external signer; OOBE hosted MCP remains non-custodial.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoRequired public display name for the SAP agent. Keep it stable enough for explorers and humans.
agentIdNoOptional stable lowercase agent id, for example solking. This is separate from the on-chain agent PDA.
pricingNoOptional pricing tiers advertised by the agent. Use tokenType usdc + settlementMode x402 for pay.sh/x402 agent commerce.
agentUriNoOptional public HTTPS/IPFS/Arweave/Kommodo URI for the agent profile metadata or profile page. Never use local desktop file paths.
protocolsNoRequired protocol tags the agent supports, for example sap, mcp, jupiter, pyth, metaplex, sns, x402, payments.
descriptionNoRequired public description of what the agent does, which protocols it can use, and its safety/trust boundaries.
metadataUriNoAlias for agentUri. Prefer a public JSON metadata document containing name, description, image, external_url, attributes, sap, metaplex, sns, and x402 fields.
capabilitiesNoRequired capability list. Prefer object form for production; strings are accepted as shorthand.
x402EndpointNoOptional public x402 discovery/payment endpoint, usually https://host/.well-known/x402 for external agent services.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesMCP content blocks returned to the caller.
isErrorNoTrue when the tool result represents an application-level error.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, which are consistent with the description of a direct write tool. The description adds important behavioral context: deprecation, requirement for local signer, blocking of hosted writes, and the need for x402 payment. No contradictions with annotations.

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 description is front-loaded with the deprecation warning and key guidance, but it is somewhat verbose with repeated execution guidance. Could be condensed without losing meaning.

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 tool's 9 optional parameters and existing output schema, the description covers deprecation, alternatives, execution context, and safety. It does not describe return values, but the output schema handles that. The guidance is sufficient for an agent to decide whether and how to use this tool.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds valuable parameter guidance, such as recommending tokenType usdc + settlementMode x402 for pricing, and warning against local file paths for agentUri. This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 this is a deprecated raw SDK wrapper for registering an SAP agent, and explicitly directs agents to use sap_payments_register_agent instead. The title also includes 'Deprecated' which immediately signals the tool's status.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit guidance: do not use this for production, use sap_payments_register_agent, and even provides a workflow (sap_agent_identity_plan first). It also explains that hosted accountless write is blocked and that this is intended for local-signer workflows.

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

All SAP MCP Server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are organized by protocol prefix (e.g., adrena_, jupiter_, sap_) which helps distinguish domains. Within each protocol, tool names clearly indicate actions (e.g., openPosition, getQuote). However, with 360 tools, some cross-protocol overlaps (e.g., multiple swap tools) and many similar fetch tools in the sap_* family require careful reading of descriptions to disambiguate.

Naming Consistency4/5

Each protocol group follows a consistent naming convention (e.g., snake_case for adrena_, camelCase for 3land, sap_ prefix for SAP SDK tools). The mix of conventions across protocols is acceptable, though a uniform style would improve predictability. Minor inconsistency: hyphenated names like metaplex-nft_ vs underscores.

Tool Count2/5

360 tools is far too many for a well-scoped MCP server. This aggregates dozens of protocols and SAP-specific features, making navigation difficult. The server would benefit from being split into focused micro-servers (e.g., SAP identity, Jupiter DEX, NFT tools). The current count overwhelms the coherence of the set.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a vast range of Solana ecosystem activities: token operations, swaps, staking, NFT management, bridging, oracle data, identity registration, chat, escrow, subscriptions, and premium streaming. Major lifecycle operations are present, though some niche subdomains may have missing functions (e.g., detailed governance or lending management). Overall, it's comprehensive for the intended scope.

Resources