Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Payram

by com.payram.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Scaffold Payram Payments & Payouts App

scaffold_payram_app
Read-onlyIdempotent

Generates a minimal full-stack app skeleton with Payram payments and payouts routes (and a simple UI) for a chosen language and framework.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "language": "<language>",
      "framework": "<framework>"
    },
    "name": "scaffold_payram_app"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
appNameNoName for the generated application. If not provided, defaults to payram-{framework}-starter
languageYesProgramming language for the application (node for JavaScript/TypeScript)
frameworkYesWeb framework to use for scaffolding the application
includeWebhooksNoWhether to include webhook handler code in the scaffolded application

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filesYes
appNameYes
languageYes
frameworkYes
instructionsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedOutput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope context (minimal skeleton, includes both payments and payouts routes, includes a UI), but it never says what artifacts are produced or how the output is delivered/consumed.

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?

A single well-formed sentence that leads with the action and layers in scope without filler. Nothing to trim.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is unnecessary, and the schema fully covers inputs. The description tells an agent enough to invoke it, though it omits any statement about constraints such as which language/framework combinations are valid.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all four parameters documented including enums and the appName default, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only echoes 'for a chosen language and framework', adding no syntax or interaction detail beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a concrete verb+resource: it generates a minimal full-stack app skeleton containing Payram payments and payouts routes plus a simple UI, parameterized by language and framework. It is clearly distinguishable from the snippet/explain siblings, but it never names an alternative to contrast against.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of when a narrow sibling like generate_payment_route_snippet or suggest_file_structure would be preferable. Usage is only implied by the word 'skeleton'.

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

All Payram toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources