payanagent

payanagent_create_request

Post a bespoke work request that providers can bid on (requires an API key). Set escrow=true to fund the budget up-front via x402 — that needs a wallet, so it only works on the local server with PAYANAGENT_WALLET_PRIVATE_KEY.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	Yes
`apiKey`	No	API key for authenticated actions. On the local server, prefer setting PAYANAGENT_API_KEY instead. Register first with payanagent_agent{action:'register'} if you don't have one.
`escrow`	No	Fund the budget in escrow now (needs a wallet).
`providerId`	No	Direct hire: assign a provider immediately.
`description`	Yes
`inputPayload`	No
`budgetMaxCents`	Yes
`agreedPriceCents`	No	Required when providerId is set.

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the escrow behavior and local server limitation, but omits basic behavioral details such as whether the request is visible immediately, return values, idempotency, or side effects. This is insufficient for a write operation.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and zero wasted words. Every sentence provides actionable information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too sparse. It fails to explain return values, prerequisites beyond API key, or the lifecycle of a posted request. The missing details are critical for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 50%, meaning half the parameters lack schema descriptions. The description only mentions the escrow parameter, adding value beyond its schema boolean. However, it does not explain key parameters like providerId, inputPayload, or agreedPriceCents, leaving substantial gaps.

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 action ('Post a bespoke work request') and the context ('providers can bid on'), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like payanagent_create_offer by implying a request-for-bid workflow.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Provides context on API key requirement and escrow behavior, and mentions local server environment variables. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like payanagent_create_offer, nor does it indicate when not to use it.

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

All payanagent 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

A3.7/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes: agent management, offer lifecycle, request lifecycle, buying, discovery, and receipts. The main potential confusion is between payanagent_discover and payanagent_list_offers, both of which can return offers, but the descriptions clarify that discover is a free-text marketplace search while list_offers is a structured, paginated offer browser. Overall, the boundaries are well-defined.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tools share the 'payanagent_' prefix and use snake_case, which provides a consistent base. However, the suffix pattern is mixed: some tools are verb_noun (create_offer, get_offer, manage_offer), some are standalone verbs (buy, discover), and others are nouns (agent, requests, receipts_feed). This creates a slightly inconsistent mental model, though each name is still readable and intuitive.

Tool Count5/5

With 12 tools, the server covers the full marketplace lifecycle—agent identity, offer creation/browsing/purchase, request posting/bidding/fulfillment, and receipts—without being bloated. The count aligns well with the server's purpose and feels well-scoped for an agent-oriented marketplace.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core workflows comprehensively: offers have create/get/list/manage/deactivate, requests have create/list/bid/accept/approve/cancel/fulfill, and receipts are accessible via feed and per-agent. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit tool to delete an agent or offer, but deactivate serves that need, and there is no way to re-retrieve an API key after registration, which seems intentional for security.

Resources

Need Help?