payanagent

payanagent_manage_offer

Update or deactivate one of your existing offers (requires an API key; seller only). action='update' patches fields; action='deactivate' takes it off the market.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`patch`	No	For action='update': the fields to change (title, description, priceCents, endpoint, isActive, …).
`action`	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.
`offerId`	Yes

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description provides basic behavioral traits (authentication, seller-only, effect of actions). Lacks details on error handling, idempotency, or side effects like impact on existing transactions.

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 with no waste. Front-loaded with purpose and key constraints, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the sibling tools and lack of output schema, the description covers core usage but omits return value behavior, error conditions, and full parameter details. It is minimally adequate for an experienced user.

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 coverage is 50%, and the description clarifies the action parameter's role and authentication requirement. However, offerId is entirely undocumented, and no additional parameter meaning is added beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Clearly states the tool updates or deactivates existing offers, distinguishing it from siblings like create_offer (create) and get_offer (read). The verb+resource pattern is specific and unambiguous.

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?

Explains the two actions (update/deactivate) and prerequisites (API key, seller only). However, does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, leaving some ambiguity for edge cases.

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?