Check the payment status of a guest order. Returns payment session details, amount, deadline, TX hash if paid, and current status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| order_id | Yes | Order ID (e.g. "BB-42") |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It usefully lists the return contents (session details, amount, deadline, TX hash if paid, current status) and implies a read-only operation via 'check' and 'returns', but it does not explicitly state that no side effects occur or describe any authorization requirements.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One concise, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and expected return values with no filler or redundancy. Every phrase earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what to pass, what the call returns, and the read-only nature. It could be more complete by explicitly distinguishing itself from create_payment/confirm_payment usage, but the core context is present.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The only parameter, order_id, has 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains it well. The description adds the 'guest order' context, but provides no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb ('check') acting on a specific resource ('guest order') and the exact kind of result (payment status). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like create_payment and confirm_payment, which perform actions rather than read status.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies this is the tool to use when needing current payment status, and the read-oriented wording contrasts with sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, leaving selection partly to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clear role in the customer, ordering, payment, or verification flow. The only potential confusions (get_catalog vs search_fish, get_catch_reports vs verify_catch) are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern using verbs like get, create, place, verify, check, and ask. Brand-specific tools like ask_gyotak and contact_gyotak still fit the same convention.
18 tools is slightly on the heavy side for a single server, but the scope spans sales, payments, customer management, and blockchain traceability, so most tools have distinct jobs. It is above the ideal range but not bloated.
The core commerce loop (register, order, pay, confirm) and traceability verification are covered well. Missing order cancellation, guest order status retrieval, or customer profile editing are minor gaps that agents can usually work around.