Agentfonts

buy_license

Buy a font licence. Call without payment to get x402 payment requirements (USDC), then again with the signed payment. Returns the signed licence and a download link per style; web licences also list WOFF2, WOFF and the original file under downloads[].formats. Spends money: confirm price and licensee with the user first.

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": {
      "use": "<use>",
      "licensee": "<licensee>"
    },
    "name": "buy_license"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`use`	Yes	Licence type. A foundry may define its own; get_family lists them
`tier`	No	Shorthand for the first dimension of the use (desktop: computers, web: visitors/month, app: apps, ebook: titles, server: cores)
`font_id`	No	One style. Or use font_ids or bundle_id.
`options`	No	Licence dimensions, e.g. {"visitors": 100000, "domains": 2} or {"cores": 8, "years": 2}. get_family lists them per use.
`payment`	No	Base64 x402 payment payload (X-PAYMENT). Omit on the first call to get the payment requirements.
`font_ids`	No	Several styles of the same family, priced per style
`licensee`	Yes	The person or organisation the licence is for. Never the agent itself.
`bundle_id`	No	A family bundle from get_family, e.g. <family_id>.family

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world call, and the description adds substantive context beyond that: it spends real money, requires a two-step payment handshake, and spells out what is returned (signed licence plus a download link per style, with WOFF2/WOFF/original listed under downloads[].formats for web licences). That is exactly the kind of consequence and auth/payment disclosure an agent needs before a financial action.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Four sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the payment flow, then the return shape, then the spending warning. No filler or redundant restatement.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description compensates by describing the returned licence and download links per style. For a money-spending, nested-object tool, the payment flow, price-confirmation caution, and return shape cover what an agent needs before invoking it.

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 coverage is 100%, so all eight parameters, including the nested licensee object and the payment payload, are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the payment round-trip but adds no syntax or constraint detail the schema lacks. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Buy a font licence') and immediately signals the purchasing semantics that separate it from a quoting tool ('Spends money'). It does not name quote_license directly, so the sibling differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a concrete call protocol: call without payment to obtain x402/USDC requirements, then call again with the signed payment. It also adds a real precondition ('confirm price and licensee with the user first'). It stops short of explicitly routing to quote_license for price-checking only, but the usage context is clear.

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

All Agentfonts 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?