Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Nas.com

by com.nas
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Confirm Plan Payment

confirm_plan_payment
Destructive

Confirm the pending saved-method plan payment only after the user explicitly approved the displayed prepared quote. Revalidates the quote and default method, checks the original signup, sends at most one confirmation request, and never retries an ambiguous charge.

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": {
      "confirmationToken": "<confirmationToken>",
      "confirmed": "<confirmed>"
    },
    "name": "confirm_plan_payment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmedYesMust be literally true, and only after the user explicitly said yes to the complete payment summary.
confirmationTokenYesConfirmation token returned by prepare_plan_payment for this payment.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmationToken / description
      Added value: +"Confirmation token returned by prepare_plan_payment for this payment."
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmed / description
      Added value: +"Must be literally true, and only after the user explicitly said yes to the complete payment summary."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, and the description earns credit by adding behavior beyond that: it revalidates the quote and default method, checks the original signup, sends at most one request, and never retries an ambiguous charge. That at-most-once/no-retry semantics is exactly the kind of non-obvious operational detail an agent needs before invoking a charge.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; every clause contributes a precondition or a behavioral guarantee, and nothing is repeated.

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 destructive payment-confirmation tool with no output schema, the description covers the key gaps: required prior approval, revalidation behavior, at-most-once sending, and no retry on ambiguity. The annotations already carry the read/write and openness profile, so nothing material is missing.

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%, and both parameters already document that confirmed must be literally true and that confirmationToken comes from prepare_plan_payment. The description restates the approval condition but adds no syntax, format, or edge-case detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Confirm the pending saved-method plan payment') and pins the scope to saved-method plan payments that are already prepared, which distinguishes it from prepare_plan_payment and the tier-change confirmation sibling.

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?

It states an explicit gate ('only after the user explicitly approved the displayed prepared quote') and ties the call to a token returned by prepare_plan_payment, so the agent knows both when to call it and when it must not; the 'only after' phrasing functions as an exclusion.

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

All Nas.com toolsInspect
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