Get the x402 HTTP payment endpoint for an owned lookup, plus a hosted Stripe URL that a human can use instead. Calling this tool does not itself charge either payment method.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description correctly notes the non-charging behavior, but does not disclose other traits such as idempotency, error handling, or permission 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?
Two concise sentences front-load the purpose and add a key behavioral note. No wasted words.
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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description explains what is returned (endpoint and URL) and notes safety, but does not explain 'owned lookup' or returned format, leaving minor gaps.
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?
Parameter coverage is 0% as description adds no information about the 'id' parameter beyond the schema's pattern and examples. With low coverage, the description should compensate but does not.
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?
Description clearly states verb 'Get' and specific resources: x402 HTTP payment endpoint and hosted Stripe URL. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_stripe_checkout and get_vat_lookup by focusing on a payment endpoint retrieval.
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?
Description includes a key behavioral note that calling does not charge, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like create_stripe_checkout or other siblings.
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 targets a distinct action: creating a checkout, creating a lookup, retrieving lookup state, and getting payment details. No overlapping purposes.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (create_*, get_*).
With 4 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose: creation, retrieval, and payment handling for VAT lookups.
Covers the core workflow (create, get, pay) but lacks list/delete operations for lookups, which are minor gaps.