Creates a Multibanco payment reference that the customer can use to pay at any ATM or via online banking in Portugal.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| amount | Yes | Payment amount in EUR (e.g. 10.50). | |
| mb_key | Yes | ifthenpay Multibanco key. | |
| order_id | Yes | Unique order identifier in your system. | |
| expiry_days | No | Number of days until the reference expires. Defaults to no expiry if omitted. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, placing full burden on the description. It lacks disclosure of important behavioral traits such as idempotency, error handling, default expiry (expiry_days optional but behavior unspecified), and what happens on duplicate order_id. The description only states the basic creation action.
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 a single, clear sentence that front-loads the purpose with no unnecessary words. Every part earns its place.
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 tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose but misses behavioral details like idempotency, error scenarios, and response format. It is adequate for basic selection but incomplete for full reliance.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a description in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning or usage guidance beyond the schema, so baseline score 3 is appropriate.
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 verb ('Creates'), resource ('Multibanco payment reference'), and outcome ('customer can use to pay at any ATM or via online banking in Portugal'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'creditcard_create_payment' and 'payshop_create_reference' by specifying the Multibanco payment method.
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 implies usage for Portuguese ATM/online banking payments but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like Mbway or creditcard. No when-not conditions or alternative recommendations are provided, leaving the agent to infer from context.
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 targets a distinct payment method or action (e.g., cofidis_create_payment vs mbway_request_payment), and the two MB WAY tools are clearly complementary (request vs check status). No ambiguity between tools.
All tool names follow a consistent `method_action` pattern in snake_case (e.g., creditcard_create_payment, mbway_check_status, payments_list). Actions like `create_payment`, `create_reference`, and `request_payment` are appropriate for their respective methods.
9 tools is well-scoped for a payment gateway MCP server, covering multiple payment methods and a list endpoint. Each tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy.
Covers creation for all payment methods and includes a status check for MB WAY. However, dedicated status/retrieve tools for other payment methods are missing; they rely on the payments_list endpoint. Missing cancellation or refund tools, which are common in payment systems.
