Wisely x402 Agent-Payment Infrastructure

x402_purchase_credits

Create or top up reusable developer credits through x402.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No
`type`	No
`asset`	No
`input`	No	Public-safe request body/input for a hosted service or endpoint. Never include secrets, raw cards, wallet keys, passwords, or private account tokens.
`items`	No
`query`	No
`since`	No
`itemId`	No
`accepts`	No
`content`	No	Public-safe creator content for preview/import. Do not include secrets, private student data, or copyrighted material you do not own.
`network`	No
`audience`	No	Optional audience hint for wisely_start_here / wisely_get_playbook / wisely_agent_instructions.
`payoutId`	No
`platform`	No	Optional OS/platform hint for local bridge setup, e.g. windows, mac, linux.
`amountUsd`	No
`creatorId`	No
`fromAsset`	No
`localPort`	No	Optional localhost port for the local commerce bridge MCP server. Defaults to 4027.
`receiptId`	No
`sellerUrl`	No	Third-party x402 paid resource URL to probe for HTTP 402 payment requirements.
`serviceId`	No
`sessionId`	No	Wallet handoff/payment session id returned by x402_wallet_handoff/connect_wallet.
`toAddress`	No
`sellerBody`	No	Public-safe POST body for an external x402 seller. Never include cookies, bearer tokens, wallet secrets, private keys, card data, or account passwords.
`contentType`	No
`fromAddress`	No
`fromNetwork`	No
`manifestUrl`	No
`paidActions`	No
`endpointSlug`	No
`sellerMethod`	No	Use POST for paid APIs that need a public-safe body before returning 402.
`payoutAddress`	No
`serverJsonUrl`	No
`idempotencyKey`	No	Stable retry key for paid invokes and wallet handoff sessions.
`paymentPayload`	No
`includeExamples`	No	Set false to request a shorter playbook response.
`fromTokenAddress`	No
`preferredNetwork`	No	Preferred payment network for wallet handoff, e.g. eip155:8453 or base.
`defaultEntitlement`	No
`paymentRequirement`	No
`paymentRequirements`	No
`returnSignedPayment`	No	Alias for includeSignedPayment.
`includeSignedPayment`	No	For x402_payment_session_status, include the signed X-PAYMENT payload when the user has signed.

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are empty, so description carries full burden. 'Create or top up' indicates a state change, but the description omits critical behavioral details such as payment implications, irreversibility, or dependency on prior handoff sessions. For a financial tool, this is a significant transparency gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, one sentence, front-loaded with the action. No wasted words. However, given the tool's complexity, the brevity works against usefulness, but for conciseness alone it's strong.

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

Completeness1/5

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

With 43 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is drastically incomplete. It doesn't explain what credits are, how the purchase flow works, expected inputs, outputs, or error handling. This is completely inadequate for a complex tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 33%, and the description adds no parameter-specific meaning. It doesn't indicate which of the 43 parameters are relevant to purchasing credits, how they interact, or which are required. The few schema descriptions cover some fields but many remain unexplained.

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 clearly states the verb and resource: 'Create or top up reusable developer credits through x402.' This is specific and differentiates from status or quote tools, though it could be more explicit about what 'credits' are.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., wallet handoff), nor when to prefer it over x402_credit_status, x402_wallet_handoff, etc. No exclusions or context provided.

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

All Wisely x402 Agent-Payment Infrastructure 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

C2.5/5.0

Disambiguation1/5

The tool set is riddled with aliases and duplicates (e.g., start_here, wisely_start_here, get_playbook, agent_instructions, readme, wisely_get_playbook, wisely_agent_instructions all serve the same purpose). Dozens of status tools and setup aliases overlap heavily, making it nearly impossible for an agent to select the right tool without testing.

Naming Consistency2/5

There is a mix of x402_ and wisely_ prefixes, plus unprefixed generic tools like start_here, connect_wallet, and readme. Alias names diverge from their canonical names (e.g., connect_wallet vs x402_wallet_handoff), and while snake_case is consistent, the pattern is not predictable across the full set.

Tool Count1/5

65 tools is far beyond what is typically appropriate for an MCP server (3-15). The count is inflated by aliases and many near-identical status/check tools, creating a bloated surface that is unnecessarily heavy and confusing for agents.

Completeness3/5

Core payment, wallet, receipt, and quote workflows are well covered. However, there are significant gaps in actual builder endpoint management (only handoff instructions, no direct create/update/delete tools) and creator catalog lifecycle (preview and onboarding handoff but no publish/update/delete tools), leaving some workflows as dead ends.

x402_purchase_credits

Input Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources