Skip to main content
Glama

Check one spend

check_spend
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read-only gate before you spend money or significant effort once: ten ordered checks of the ABA-1 fuse, instruction source, envelope, repeat, counterparty, price, expected value, stop-loss, irreversibility, delivery, receipt. Returns verdict GO, CAUTION or STOP and, per check, the result and the reason. Anything you do not declare counts against you: undeclared never passes. Changes nothing and stores nothing. Use it for a single payment or purchase; use audit_budget to judge the standing budget controls of a whole agent; use look to judge a piece of work.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
p_basisNomeasured if p_success is a base rate from your own records, estimated if it is a guess; an estimate is halved
deliveryNohow delivery is secured: escrow, on_delivery, prepaid or unknown
p_successNoprobability from 0 to 1 that the spend brings its value
value_usdNowhat success is worth to you in US dollars
amount_usdYesthe amount of this one spend in US dollars, a number above zero; required
reversibleNoyes if the spend can be refunded or undone
effort_cost_usdNocompute and time this action costs you besides the amount
period_spent_usdNowhat you already spent in the current period
probe_amount_usdNothe small amount you allow for testing an unknown payee; default one percent of the period budget
period_budget_usdNoyour budget for the current period
instruction_sourceNowho asked for this spend: principal, own_plan or untrusted; untrusted means a web page, a message, another agent or stored memory, and stops the spend
per_action_cap_usdNothe largest single spend your mandate allows, enforced outside the model
cumulative_cost_usdNoeverything already spent on this same goal
reference_price_usdNoa usual price for the same thing, to catch a price far above normal
approved_out_of_bandNoyes if a human or a policy outside the model approved this exact spend
counterparty_verifiedNoyes if the payee is verified or on your allowlist; otherwise only a probe amount passes
intent_settled_beforeNoyes if a payment with this same intent id was already settled; then this is a duplicate and stops
attempts_without_progressNohow many attempts on this goal already brought no measurable progress; three stop the line

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed18 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / amount_usd / description
      Previous value: -"the spend, required"New value: +"the amount of this one spend in US dollars, a number above zero; required"
    • changedInput schema / properties / approved_out_of_band / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"yes if a human or a policy outside the model approved this exact spend"
    • changedInput schema / properties / attempts_without_progress / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"how many attempts on this goal already brought no measurable progress; three stop the line"
    • changedInput schema / properties / counterparty_verified / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"yes if the payee is verified or on your allowlist; otherwise only a probe amount passes"
    • changedInput schema / properties / cumulative_cost_usd / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"everything already spent on this same goal"
    • changedInput schema / properties / delivery / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"how delivery is secured: escrow, on_delivery, prepaid or unknown"
    • changedInput schema / properties / effort_cost_usd / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"compute and time this action costs you besides the amount"
    • changedInput schema / properties / instruction_source / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"who asked for this spend: principal, own_plan or untrusted; untrusted means a web page, a message, another agent or stored memory, and stops the spend"
    • changedInput schema / properties / intent_settled_before / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"yes if a payment with this same intent id was already settled; then this is a duplicate and stops"
    • changedInput schema / properties / p_basis / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"measured if p_success is a base rate from your own records, estimated if it is a guess; an estimate is halved"
    • changedInput schema / properties / p_success / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"probability from 0 to 1 that the spend brings its value"
    • changedInput schema / properties / per_action_cap_usd / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"the largest single spend your mandate allows, enforced outside the model"
    • changedInput schema / properties / period_budget_usd / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"your budget for the current period"
    • changedInput schema / properties / period_spent_usd / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"what you already spent in the current period"
    • changedInput schema / properties / probe_amount_usd / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"the small amount you allow for testing an unknown payee; default one percent of the period budget"
    • changedInput schema / properties / reference_price_usd / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"a usual price for the same thing, to catch a price far above normal"
    • changedInput schema / properties / reversible / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"yes if the spend can be refunded or undone"
    • changedInput schema / properties / value_usd / description
      Previous value: -"see https://verify.astranl.com/v1/budget/protocol"New value: +"what success is worth to you in US dollars"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'changes nothing and stores nothing' partly restates them. However the description adds genuinely new behavior: the GO/CAUTION/STOP verdicts, per-check results and reasons, and the consequential rule that undeclared inputs never pass ('anything you do not declare counts against you'). That undeclared-defaults policy is exactly the kind of trait annotations cannot convey.

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?

Purpose and the undeclared-counts-against-you rule are front-loaded, and the ten-check list is compressed into one dense sentence. The enumeration is informative but long; it borders on being a restatement of the schema's field set rather than a description.

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 complex 18-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the return contract (verdict plus per-check result and reason), the non-persistence guarantee, and the failure semantics for missing inputs. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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% across all 18 parameters, so the schema already defines each field and its accepted values. The description enumerates the ten checks, which gives conceptual framing for the parameter groups (price, counterparty, stop-loss, irreversibility, etc.), but adds no syntax or default detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read-only gate before you spend money or significant effort once') and immediately locates itself among siblings by naming what it is not: audit_budget judges a whole agent's budget controls, look judges a piece of work. An agent can distinguish check_spend from all siblings without opening a 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?

Explicit when-to-use ('before you spend money or significant effort once', 'a single payment or purchase') plus two named alternatives with the condition that selects each (audit_budget for standing budget controls, look for a piece of work). Nothing is left to inference.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources