Checkout methods open right now: "crypto" (a hosted invoice: BTC, ETH, TRX, USDT), "card", and "wallet" (a prepaid balance, see create_wallet).
`gateways` names the providers behind each method; a checkout that does not
ask for one by name goes to the first, which is what these tools do.| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds meaningful behavior: methods are dynamic ('open right now'), crypto is a hosted invoice, and `gateways` has ordering semantics where unspecified checkouts default to the first provider. This goes well beyond the structured metadata.
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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, then expands into valuable method and gateway context. The only slight weakness is the final clause 'which is what these tools do,' which is a little ambiguous about which tools are being referred to.
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?
For a no-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is complete: it explains each payment method, points to the wallet creation sibling, and clarifies the gateway default behavior. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to call this tool correctly.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so parameter documentation is not needed; the schema coverage is trivially complete. The description instead contributes to understanding the output semantics, which is appropriate for a no-argument tool.
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 identifies the tool as returning currently available checkout methods (crypto, card, wallet) and adds provider-level detail via the `gateways` field. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_wallet, since it enumerates payment methods rather than balances or orders.
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 gives practical context by explaining what each method means and points to create_wallet as the relevant sibling for prepaid balances. It does not explicitly state 'use this before create_checkout' or list exclusions, but the usage context is reasonably clear for a zero-parameter read-only tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool maps to a distinct entity or action: destinations, plans, checkout, wallet purchase, deposits, wallet, orders, usage, top-ups, and payment methods. create_checkout and purchase_esim both place orders but are clearly differentiated by funding source and explicitly cross-referenced in descriptions.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: create_*, get_*, list_*, search_*, purchase_esim. There are no mixed conventions or vague verbs.
12 tools is well-scoped for an eSIM storefront plus wallet subsystem. Each tool has a distinct role, and none feel redundant or excessive.
The set covers destination discovery, plan selection, checkout and wallet purchases, order tracking, wallet funding, top-ups, and usage checks. Minor gaps exist around cancellation/refund flows and listing non-wallet orders, but the core lifecycle is well covered.