Papaya Pay Any Bill (USA)

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

Analyze Bill

analyze_bill

Read a bill from the user's description and create it for payment. This is the first step. Capture every address and identifier on the bill (remit-to address, account/invoice number, any code or pin) - missing details can delay or fail the payment. The remit-to address (where payment is sent) is especially important: it is what identifies the correct biller, and a wrong or missing one can match the bill to the wrong biller and cause a failed or delayed payment. Always include it. If the bill does not show a remit-to address, research the biller's official remit-to / payment address online and use that rather than omitting it. For the same reason, capture the bill's online-payment URL in payUrl and any payment phone number in otherInfo whenever the bill shows them - these strongly identify the correct biller. Always secure a user identifier so the payment can be applied to the right account or charge: capture the account/customer number in the account field, and any invoice, ticket, or reference number in otherInfo - capture all that the bill shows, since some billers need the account number plus another identifier. If the bill shows none, ask the user for one rather than proceeding without it. Before calling, ask the user how much they want to pay (the full balance amountDue, or a partial amount), then pass it as amount_to_pay and quote what they said in user_amount_statement - both are required (never invent the amount). If the payment carries a fee, the result includes a fees list - show any returned fee to the user before continuing. The result also includes a payment_link: give this link to the user as-is so they can enter their card on the secure form (the only way to set a payment method). If the user already exists from a prior bill, pass their user_id and auth_token to reuse the account.

Args:
    bill_description: structured bill details, including amountDue, amount_to_pay
        and user_amount_statement

Returns:
    bill/user identifiers, tokens, provider, amount due, the chosen amount_to_pay,
    a payment_link to the secure card form, and any user-facing fees

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bill_description`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the minimal annotations: it mentions the result includes a fees list and a payment_link, instructs to show fees to the user, requires user_amount_statement as proof of user confirmation, and explains reuse of user_id/auth_token. There is no contradiction with readOnlyHint=false since it states the operation creates the bill for payment.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is lengthy but dense with actionable instructions that are all relevant to correct invocation. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then systematically covers identifiers, user confirmation, and result handling. It could benefit from bullet points for readability, but it remains appropriately sized for the complexity.

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?

The description fully covers the workflow prerequisites (asking the user for amount, quoting their statement), critical outputs (fees list, payment_link) and how to handle them, and reuse of existing user tokens. Since an output schema exists, it need not enumerate every return field; it focuses on the behavioral aspects essential for correct use, making it complete for a complex tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The top-level bill_description parameter has 0% schema description coverage, but the description compensates by naming key subfields (remitAddress, payUrl, account, otherInfo, amount_to_pay, user_amount_statement, user_id, auth_token) and providing operational guidance like researching missing remit-to addresses and quoting the user's stated amount. The nested schema already documents each field, so the description adds valuable context without over-repeating schema detail.

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 opens with 'Read a bill from the user's description and create it for payment' and explicitly labels it 'the first step', making the action and scope clear. This differentiates it from sibling tools like check_payment_method, confirm_payment_intent, fetch_bill_status, and request_bill_cancellation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It provides strong usage context by stating this is the first step in the payment flow and instructs the agent to ask the user for the amount to pay before calling. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, relying on the 'first step' framing rather than explicit exclusions.

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 (USA) 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

A4.5/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct role in the payment workflow: analyzing/creating a bill, checking card status, confirming payment, fetching payment status, refreshing auth tokens, and cancelling a bill. There is no meaningful overlap between these operations.

Naming Consistency5/5

All six tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (analyze_bill, check_payment_method, confirm_payment_intent, fetch_bill_status, get_new_auth_token, request_bill_cancellation). The naming is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for a bill payment server, covering the full lifecycle without unnecessary redundancy or overwhelming complexity. Each tool serves a clear purpose in the workflow.

Completeness5/5

The tools cover the complete bill payment lifecycle: creating/analyzing a bill, verifying payment method, confirming payment, checking status, cancelling, and handling auth token refresh. No obvious gaps exist for the stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?