Thailand Payments (Opn/Omise — PromptPay QR / cards / TrueMoney)
Server Details
Thailand payments for AI agents — PromptPay QR, cards, TrueMoney via Opn (Omise). Never holds funds.
- Status
- Healthy
- 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 4.4/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools have completely distinct purposes: one creates a payment link, the other queries its status. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Both tool names follow the verb_noun pattern consistently: 'create_payment_link' and 'query_payment_status'. The naming is clear and predictable.
With only 2 tools, the server is minimal but covers the essential operations for creating and monitoring a payment link. However, it lacks other common payment operations like cancellation or refund, making the count borderline.
The tools cover the core workflow of creating and checking payment status, but notable gaps exist such as the ability to cancel a link or handle refunds. For a payment server, this is partially complete.
Available Tools
2 toolscreate_payment_linkAInspect
Create a Thailand payment link in THB via Opn Payments (formerly Omise), a major Thai payment gateway. Buyer pays with PromptPay QR (Thailand's national instant payment), credit/debit card, TrueMoney wallet, or internet banking — whatever is enabled on the merchant account. Returns a hosted payment page URL the buyer opens to pay — payment completes automatically, no confirm step. Amounts in THB baht (decimals allowed, e.g. 350.50; minimum ฿20). Bring your own Opn secret key via the x-omise-secret-key header (free skey_test_ keys from dashboard.omise.co; test keys never move real money). Money always flows buyer→Opn→merchant; this service never touches funds.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | Short title of the payment shown to the buyer (≤255 chars) | |
| amount_thb | Yes | Amount in THB baht (e.g. 350.50; converted to satang internally). Minimum ฿20. | |
| description | No | Optional longer description shown on the payment page. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds transparency beyond annotations by explaining the payment flow (automatic, no confirm step), authentication via header, and that money never touches this service. It does not contradict annotations.
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?
The description is concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. While it's a single paragraph, it could be structured with bullet points for better readability, but it contains no fluff.
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?
Given the tool's complexity and lack of output schema, the description covers key aspects: action, payment methods, currency, authentication, and money flow. It could mention error handling, but overall it's complete.
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 the description adds value by explaining amount in THB, minimum ฿20, and internal conversion to satang. It provides context not present in 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 tool creates a Thailand payment link via Opn Payments, specifying payment methods and the flow. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'query_payment_status' by focusing on 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?
The description explains when to use the tool (to create payment links for Thai buyers) and provides context about authentication and test keys. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the guidance is clear enough.
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 Thailand payment link (created by create_payment_link) has been paid. Fetches the link from Opn (Omise) directly — a reliable pull-based alternative to webhooks. paid=true when the link is paid; last_charge_failure explains a failed attempt.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| link_id | Yes | The link_id returned by create_payment_link (link_...) |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds useful behavioral context: it fetches directly from Opn (pull-based) and explains the response fields (paid, last_charge_failure). 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?
Two efficient sentences that front-load the main purpose and provide essential details without redundancy.
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?
The description is complete for a simple query tool: covers purpose, source, output fields, and is supported by annotations. No output schema needed.
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 the description adds value by indicating the link_id comes from create_payment_link, providing context beyond the schema's property description.
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 tool checks payment status of a Thailand payment link, specifies it fetches from Opn/Omise as a pull-based alternative to webhooks, and differentiates from its sibling create_payment_link by being a read operation.
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 implies when to use (checking payment status without webhooks) and provides context, but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives. However, the purpose is clear and the context is sufficient.
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!