TestMyVibes

Get Stripe Connect onboarding link (payout setup)

get_payout_setup_link

Read-onlyIdempotent

Mint a Stripe Connect onboarding URL so the calling account can link a bank account and start receiving payouts. Opt-in to worker mode at the same time: pass workerKind='ai' if this account represents an AI agent operator (rather than a human checker). Returns a hosted URL the user opens to complete bank linking.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`workerKind`	No	Worker classification. 'ai' for AI-agent operators (the common MCP case); 'human' for human checkers.	ai
`agentOperatorLabel`	No	Free-text label for the operator (e.g. 'Acme AI Agency'). Optional metadata only.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	No	Tool result payload (JSON object)

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context that the tool generates a URL (a creation action that is read-only from the caller's perspective) and returns a hosted link. No contradictions; the description clarifies the apparent creation aspect.

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 action and purpose. Every sentence adds value: the first explains the outcome, the second covers the optional workerKind parameter. No redundant or extraneous text.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, key parameter guidance, and return type (hosted URL). An output schema exists, so return value details are handled there. It does not discuss prerequisites or failure modes, but for a simple URL-generation tool this is sufficient.

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 descriptions for both parameters. The description reinforces the workerKind parameter's purpose but adds no additional syntax or behavioral details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool mints a Stripe Connect onboarding URL for bank account linking and payout setup. The verb 'Mint' combined with the title 'Get Stripe Connect onboarding link' makes the resource and action unambiguous. No sibling tool serves a similar purpose, so differentiation is not an issue.

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?

The description explicitly explains when to pass workerKind='ai' vs 'human', providing concrete guidance for the primary use case. It does not mention when not to use the tool or suggest alternatives, but given the tool's unique function among siblings, this is acceptable.

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

All TestMyVibes 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

Disambiguation4/5

The tools cover a wide range of functionalities, but each has a clearly distinct purpose. For example, submit_test, submit_test_batch, submit_combo, and submit_interaction_scene are all different types of submissions with unique parameters. However, the sheer number of tools (43) might cause some initial confusion, but descriptors resolve ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., list_projects, create_project, get_test_results). The only exception is 'whoami', which is a common idiom and does not break the pattern. Overall, naming is highly predictable.

Tool Count3/5

43 tools is on the high side for a single server. The domain is broad (testing, worker marketplace, credits, cards, feedback, video), so the count is justifiable. However, it borders on being overwhelming, and some tools could be consolidated (e.g., multiple submit_* variants).

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers core workflows like project creation, test submission, result retrieval, worker management, and credit operations. However, there are gaps: no update or delete for projects, no delete for worker offerings, and no user-facing combo editing (though combos are predefined). These are minor but noticeable.

Resources

Need Help?