Kazakhstan Payments (Freedom Pay — cards (Freedom Pay))
Server Details
Kazakhstan payments for AI agents — cards (Freedom Pay) via Freedom Pay. Never holds funds.
- Status
- Unhealthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.5/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one creates a payment link, the other queries its status. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Both tools follow the verb_noun pattern consistently (create_payment_link, query_payment_status), making them predictable.
With only two tools, the surface is minimal but sufficient for basic create-and-check payment flow. However, for a payment server, additional operations like cancellation or refund would be expected.
The tool set covers only creation and status query. Missing operations like cancelling a payment link, listing payments, or handling refunds/chargebacks leave significant gaps for agents handling full payment lifecycle.
Available Tools
2 toolscreate_payment_linkAInspect
Create a payment link in KZT for Kazakhstan via Freedom Pay. Buyer pays with cards, Apple Pay / Google Pay via Freedom Pay. Returns a hosted checkout URL the buyer opens to pay — payment completes automatically, no confirm step. Bring your own credentials via HTTP header (x-freedompay-merchant-id; free test credentials from freedompay.kz never move real money). Money always flows buyer→Freedom Pay→merchant; this service never touches funds.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| amount_kzt | Yes | Amount in KZT (integer), e.g. 1000. Minimum 100. | |
| description | Yes | What this payment is for (shown to the buyer, ≤200 chars) | |
| success_url | No | Optional https URL to send the buyer to after payment. | |
| reference_id | No | Your unique order reference (≤40 chars). Auto-generated if omitted. | |
| customer_email | No | Optional buyer email. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses key behaviors beyond annotations: automatic completion (no confirm step), credential requirements, test credential implications, and money flow (buyer→Freedom Pay→merchant). No contradictions with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false).
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with essential information. No unnecessary words; each sentence adds distinct value (purpose, method, flow, credentials).
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers purpose, payment flow, credential handling, and return value (hosted checkout URL). Lacks details on error handling, timeouts, or exact URL format, but sufficient for an AI agent given annotations and schema.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, and description adds context like example values (e.g., 1000 for amount_kzt), explanation of description parameter, and auto-generation for reference_id. Enhances schema without redundancy.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool creates a payment link in KZT for Kazakhstan via Freedom Pay, specifying payment methods and the automated payment flow. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'query_payment_status' which handles status queries, not creation.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Clear guidance on when to use: creating payment links for Kazakhstan market. Includes credential requirements, test credential behavior, and money flow. Lacks explicit exclusion cases but provides sufficient context for appropriate use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
query_payment_statusARead-onlyInspect
Check whether a Kazakhstan payment (created by create_payment_link) has been paid. Queries Freedom Pay directly — pull-based, no webhook needed. paid=true when status is PAID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| order_id | Yes | The order_id returned by create_payment_link |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) are present. The description adds that it is pull-based and explains the paid=true condition, providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three concise sentences front-load the purpose and key details. No unnecessary words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema, the description partially explains the return value ('paid=true when status is PAID') but does not specify the full response structure or error cases. Adequate but not fully complete for an agent without output schema.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with order_id described as 'The order_id returned by create_payment_link'. The description reinforces this by linking to the sibling tool, adding value beyond the schema alone.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the purpose: 'Check whether a Kazakhstan payment ... has been paid.' It specifies the verb 'check' and resource 'payment status', and differentiates from the sibling tool create_payment_link by implying it's the read counterpart.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description says 'Queries Freedom Pay directly — pull-based, no webhook needed,' indicating when to use this tool over alternatives. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!