Papaya Pay Any Bill (US)

by com.papayapay.consumer-production.mcp-agent

Refresh Auth Token

get_new_auth_token

Get a fresh auth token when another tool fails with an authorization error. Pass the user's current refresh_token; returns a new auth_token/refresh_token pair to use on the retried call and on later calls. Call this only in response to an auth failure, not preemptively.

Args:
    new_token_input: contains the user's refresh token

Returns:
    a new auth_token and refresh_token pair, or an error if the refresh token is
    missing or invalid

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`new_token_input`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses that the tool returns a new token pair and errors for missing/invalid refresh tokens, which is sufficient. Annotations indicate non-destructive and non-read-only, and the description does not contradict them. Minor omission: no mention of whether old tokens are invalidated.

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?

The description is concise, uses two short paragraphs with a clear Args/Returns structure, and contains no filler. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the simple tool with one parameter and clear purpose, the description provides all necessary context. The presence of an output schema (though not shown) and explicit return value description complete the picture.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description explains the single parameter 'new_token_input' contains the user's refresh token, and the schema provides additional detail. Together they fully clarify the parameter's purpose.

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 clearly states the tool obtains a fresh auth token in response to authorization failures. The name and title align, and it is distinct from sibling tools which handle billing and payment operations.

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?

The description explicitly instructs to call only on auth failure, not preemptively. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All Papaya Pay Any Bill (US) tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct step in the bill payment lifecycle: analyze creates the bill, check_payment_method verifies card setup, confirm_payment_intent submits payment, fetch_bill_status tracks payment status, request_bill_cancellation stops a payment, and get_new_auth_token handles auth refresh. No two tools overlap in purpose, and descriptions clearly differentiate the check status vs. check card method tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

All six tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case: analyze_bill, check_payment_method, confirm_payment_intent, fetch_bill_status, get_new_auth_token, request_bill_cancellation. Verbs are descriptive and distinct, with no mixed conventions or ambiguous short names.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for a bill payment domain: two core steps (analyze and confirm), one optional verification (card check), one status query, one cancellation, and one auth helper. The count feels neither sparse nor bloated, and each tool contributes to the core workflow.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full lifecycle of paying a bill: create, set payment method, confirm payment, check status, and cancel if needed. Auth token refresh covers authorization failures, and re-running analyze_bill handles corrections. No obvious gaps that would cause agent failures in the intended use case.

Resources

Need Help?