AZPay Monetize — Sepolia Sandbox

Cancel checkout

cancel_checkout

Use this to invalidate an unused confirmation so pay_and_access cannot spend it. Use get_checkout_status to read the state first. Required input: confirmation from prepare_checkout. Returns the cancelled checkout. It cannot cancel a payment that has already settled.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "confirmation": "<confirmation>"
    },
    "name": "cancel_checkout"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`confirmation`	Yes	Required. Unused single-use confirmation from prepare_checkout.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedNov 9, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / confirmacao

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Deprecated alias of confirmation.",
-  "maxLength": 512,
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedInput schema / properties / confirmation / description

Previous value: -"Unused single-use confirmation to invalidate."New value: +"Required. Unused single-use confirmation from prepare_checkout."

addedInput schema / properties / confirmation / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "confirmation"
+]
```

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the write-but-not-destructive profile, and the description adds real context on top: the effect on a downstream tool, the returned value, and the settled-payment limitation. It stops short of covering failure modes or permission requirements, which keeps it below a 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the imperative purpose, then prerequisite, input, return, and constraint in five compact sentences with no filler. The 'Required input' clause mildly duplicates the schema's own parameter text, a minor redundancy in an otherwise efficient definition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, input provenance, return value, and the key failure boundary. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing, and the return value is described since no output schema exists.

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% and the parameter already documents provenance from prepare_checkout and single-use semantics, so the description's 'Required input: confirmation from prepare_checkout' is largely a restatement. It reinforces rather than adds, but it is consistent and useful in context.

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 opens with a specific verb and object: invalidate an unused confirmation. It further distinguishes itself from pay_and_access by explaining the consequence (that tool can no longer spend it), so an agent can tell the two apart without opening either schema.

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?

It states the use case (an unused confirmation you want to make unusable), names a prerequisite step and alternative (get_checkout_status to read state first), and gives an explicit exclusion (already-settled payments cannot be cancelled). Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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

All AZPay Monetize — Sepolia Sandbox tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?