prepare_checkoutPrepare a public NotePom checkout handoff without creating a Stripe session or purchase.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | ||
| title | Yes | ||
| seller | Yes | ||
| currency | Yes | ||
| amountMinor | Yes | ||
| checkoutUrl | Yes | ||
| purchaseCreated | Yes | ||
| currencyExponent | Yes | ||
| requiresWebConsent | Yes | ||
| stripeSessionCreated | Yes |
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=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is provided. The description adds useful context by explicitly ruling out Stripe session creation and purchase, but does not explain what 'preparing a handoff' actually involves or what side effects, if any, occur.
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 sentence with no redundant wording. It front-loads the main action ('Prepare') and immediately clarifies an important exclusion, making every word informative.
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?
The tool has one required parameter and an output schema, so the basic calling context is fairly complete. However, the concept of a 'checkout handoff' is left undefined, and the description provides no workflow context about when this preparation step is needed or how it relates to Stripe session creation, leaving a notable gap for an agent deciding when to call it.
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 0%, and the description does not explain the meaning of the required 'slug' parameter beyond its name. Since the description mentions a public NotePom checkout handoff, it weakly implies the slug references a public page, but this is not explicit and the description does not compensate for the schema's lack of documentation.
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 states a specific verb ('prepare') and a clear resource ('a public NotePom checkout handoff'), and explicitly distinguishes this from creating a Stripe session or purchase. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not name a competing sibling tool for direct comparison.
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?
There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_stripe_onboarding_session. The statement 'without creating a Stripe session or purchase' clarifies a boundary but does not explain the intended workflow or conditions under which an agent should invoke this 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.
Most tools target a distinct resource and action, and lifecycle pairs like publish_note_listing vs publish_media_listing or get_note vs get_collaboration_note are separated by clear wording. A few near-pairs such as move_file vs move_workspace_item and trash_file vs trash_workspace_item could still cause an agent to pick the wrong tool without careful reading.
All 38 tools follow one consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern with no camelCase or mixed conventions. Even less common verbs like upsert, trash, purge, and validate are applied uniformly, making the tool set predictable.
38 tools is well above the 25+ threshold and makes the overall surface feel heavy for tool selection. The number is defensible given the broad workspace, collaboration, and marketplace scope, but as a single MCP server it is not especially well-scoped.
The tool set covers workspace content lifecycle, collaboration, public pages, marketplace listings, Stripe seller flow, and agent registration without major dead ends. Minor gaps exist, such as no permanent delete outside of the trash flow and no direct collaboration-note deletion, but core workflows are supported.