Skip to main content
Glama

SAP MCP Server

by ai.oobeprotocol.sap.mcp

Prepare SAP x402 Payment

sap_x402_prepare_payment

Prepare an x402 payment context using SDK X402Registry.preparePayment. New production escrow funding should use Escrow V2 fields and nonce-aware flows. SAP MCP context: Payment and settlement flow. Estimate or fetch state before creating escrows or settling calls; write operations require an enabled signer mode and MCP policy approval.

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: SAP MCP tool workflow. Pricing: paid value-action; preview cost and transaction effects before user confirmation. Routing: paid hosted call; call sap_estimate_tool_cost first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool if the runtime cannot handle x402 natively. Signer boundary: hosted reads/builders never receive keypair bytes; value-moving results must be finalized locally when signing is required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nonceNoOptional escrow nonce as a decimal string. Defaults to 0.
depositNoInitial deposit as a decimal string. Amount in the escrow token smallest unit: lamports for SOL, micro-USDC for USDC, or base units for the configured SPL token.
maxCallsNoOptional maximum number of calls covered
expiresAtNoOptional expiry timestamp in unix seconds
tokenMintNoOptional SPL token mint; omit/null for SOL. Use EPjFWdd5AufqSSqeM2qN1xzybapC8G4wEGGkZwyTDt1v for mainnet USDC.
agentWalletNoAgent wallet public key (base58)
volumeCurveNoOptional array of { afterCalls, pricePerCall } pricing breakpoints
pricePerCallNoPrice per call as a decimal string. Amount in the escrow token smallest unit: lamports for SOL, micro-USDC for USDC, or base units for the configured SPL token.
tokenDecimalsNoOptional token decimals. Defaults to 6 for USDC/SPL flows when supplied by the SDK and 9 for native SOL.
networkIdentifierNoOptional x402 network identifier written into headers

Output Schema

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

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds that write operations require an enabled signer mode and MCP policy approval. This provides behavioral context beyond annotations, but the description does not fully disclose the on-chain effects or state changes of preparing a payment context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is verbose and includes generic boilerplate ('SAP MCP execution guidance') that is not unique to this tool. The essential information is mixed with repetitive phrases, making it less concise than optimal.

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?

Given the 10 parameters and existence of output schema, the description provides basic workflow context (estimate cost, routing) but does not explain the return value or how this tool fits into the broader x402 payment lifecycle. It is adequate but leaves gaps about subsequent steps.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides. It mentions Escrow V2 fields and nonce-aware flows, but this is not tied to individual parameters.

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: 'Prepare an x402 payment context using SDK X402Registry.preparePayment.' It identifies the specific verb (prepare) and resource (x402 payment context), distinguishing it from sibling x402 tools like fetching or settling escrows.

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 notes that 'New production escrow funding should use Escrow V2 fields and nonce-aware flows' and advises to estimate or fetch state before creating escrows. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternative tools (e.g., sap_x402_build_headers_from_escrow) or specify when not to use this tool.

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