PikaSim

order_sms_verification

Destructive

Buy a QUICK SMS verification number: returns a temporary phone number the user enters on the target service, then the incoming code is read with check_sms_verification. This SPENDS the wallet balance (typically $0.50-$5). Single-use, valid 20 minutes, auto-refunds if no SMS arrives. Use search_sms_services and get_sms_service_countries first to pick serviceId and countryId. Requires a connected agent wallet.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`countryId`	No	The countryId from get_sms_service_countries (defaults to United States)
`requestId`	No	Idempotency key: generate a fresh UUID for each NEW order, and reuse the SAME value when retrying after a timeout or transport error — an identical retry returns the original order instead of charging again. Use a NEW id when deliberately ordering another number.
`serviceId`	Yes	The serviceId from search_sms_services

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only state destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds rich specifics: wallet balance deduction ($0.50-$5), single-use, 20-minute validity, and auto-refund if no SMS arrives. This goes well beyond the binary hints and fully discloses the tool's side effects.

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?

Five sentences, each with a distinct purpose: purpose/flow, cost, lifecycle/refund, prerequisites, and wallet requirement. No redundancy, no fluff, and the most important action is front-loaded.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description tells the agent the main return (a temporary phone number) and covers all critical operational aspects: cost, validity, refund behavior, prerequisites, and the need for a wallet. The idempotency key is documented in the schema, so the tool is effectively complete for an agent.

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 100% with detailed parameter descriptions for serviceId, countryId, and requestId (including idempotency semantics). The description reinforces that serviceId and countryId come from lookup tools, but it adds no new syntax or format details beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Buy a QUICK SMS verification number' – a specific verb and resource. It explains the flow (returns a temporary number, then read with check_sms_verification) and clearly distinguishes this ordering tool from sibling check/cancel tools.

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?

Provides clear context: prerequisites (search_sms_services and get_sms_service_countries first), a wallet requirement, and the follow-up tool to use. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the sequential guidance is unambiguous and sufficient for an agent to know when to invoke this tool.

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

All PikaSim 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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation3/5

There is notable overlap between search tools (search, search_esim_packages, search_phone_plans) and detail tools (fetch, get_package_details, get_pricing, get_phone_plan_pricing). While descriptions clarify some differences, agents may struggle to pick the right tool without careful reading, especially between 'search' and 'search_esim_packages' and between 'fetch' and 'get_package_details'.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clear verb_noun convention (e.g., purchase_esim, list_orders, get_balance). A few are single verbs like 'fetch' and 'search', which stand out but are still recognizable as actions. Overall the pattern is predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

With 31 tools, this is a large set. The server covers several distinct sub-domains (eSIM data, phone-number eSIM, SMS verification, SMS rentals, wallet management), which justifies some size, but the count is on the high side and could be consolidated (e.g., merging search tools or detail-fetching tools).

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle for each product line: search, view details, purchase, list, check status, top-up/cancel, plus wallet management. The only minor gap is a lack of explicit update tools (e.g., changing a phone plan), but core workflows are well supported.

Resources

Need Help?