AEO Auditing

create_fix_kit_checkout

Create an instant Stripe Checkout link to unlock the 24-Hour Single-Domain Deep AI Remediation Kit ($2 one-time), Pro 5-Domain Watchdog ($5/mo), or Agency 30-Domain Suite ($15/mo).

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": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "create_fix_kit_checkout"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tier`	No	Plan tier to purchase: "single" ($2 One-Time 24h Fix Kit), "pro" ($5/mo 5 Domains), or "agency" ($15/mo 30 Client Domains).
`domain`	Yes	Target website domain to unlock the AI Fix Kit for (e.g. "yourcompany.com").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the result is a Stripe Checkout link, the pricing model (one-time vs recurring), and the domain scope per tier. However, it omits what the response actually contains, whether authentication is required, whether links expire or are single-use, and what happens for an invalid or already-unlocked domain.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the action and return artifact stated first, followed by the tier options. Slightly redundant in restating prices already enumerated in the schema's tier parameter description.

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?

Short but adequate for a two-parameter tool whose schema is fully documented and whose sibling context makes the purchasing role clear. There is no output schema, so the description would benefit from stating that the returned checkout URL is what the caller should hand to the user, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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%, with both `tier` and `domain` fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description's tier names and prices duplicate the schema's tier description rather than adding meaning such as default tier behavior or domain format validation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Create an instant Stripe Checkout link' to unlock one of three named paid tiers. The purpose is unambiguous without opening the schema. It does not differentiate itself from siblings such as generate_remediation_kit, which also relate to unlocking remediation output.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the purchasing step that unlocks the Fix Kit tiers. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing an audited domain first), and no guidance on when to prefer generate_remediation_kit instead.

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

All AEO Auditing tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?