Kann KI das? Sponsoring
Server Details
Find available sponsorship slots and create buyer-confirmed Stripe Checkouts on kannkidas.de.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.4/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
The two tools serve entirely distinct functions: one lists available slots, the other creates a checkout. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: list_sponsor_slots and create_sponsor_checkout. The naming is clear, predictable, and uniform.
With only two tools, the server feels thin and is on the borderline of being too minimal. However, the narrow scope of handling sponsorship checkout might justify the small count, though additional related tools would strengthen it.
The server covers the basic flow of viewing slots and initiating a checkout, but lacks tools for managing existing sponsorships, checking checkout status, or handling cancellations. This leaves notable gaps in the sponsorship lifecycle.
Available Tools
2 toolscreate_sponsor_checkoutCreate sponsor checkoutAIdempotentInspect
Create a Stripe hosted checkout only after explicit buyer confirmation of slot, EUR 990 net price and 30-day term.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slot_id | Yes | Confirmed sponsor slot identifier selected by the buyer. | |
| buyer_confirmed | Yes | Must be true only after the buyer explicitly confirms the slot, EUR 990 net price and 30-day term. | |
| idempotency_key | Yes | Stable retry key for this exact buyer and slot request; reuse it for safe retries. |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| amount | Yes | Net amount in euro cents. |
| status | Yes | Current purchase lifecycle state. |
| slot_id | Yes | Reserved sponsor slot identifier. |
| currency | Yes | ISO 4217 settlement currency. |
| expires_at | Yes | Time at which the checkout hold expires. |
| status_url | Yes | Status endpoint for this purchase. |
| purchase_id | Yes | Stable purchase identifier. |
| checkout_url | No | Stripe-hosted checkout URL when payment is still open. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds the important 'only after confirmation' constraint, but it does not disclose further side effects (e.g., payment flow or external Stripe interaction). With annotations, this is acceptable but not exceptional.
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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary action and includes the critical precondition. No filler or redundant content.
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?
The description is concise but sufficient for a simple create operation. It states the tool's purpose and necessary precondition. While it doesn't mention the return value, an output schema is present, and the annotations cover idempotency and safety profile.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with detailed descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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?
The description clearly states the specific action: 'Create a Stripe hosted checkout' with a resource and scope. It also adds the key precondition ('only after explicit buyer confirmation'), and it is easily distinguished from the sibling tool list_sponsor_slots.
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 provides explicit timing guidance ('only after explicit buyer confirmation') and specifies the confirmed details (slot, EUR 990 net price, 30-day term). It does not explicitly compare with the sibling tool, but the intent is clear enough for an agent to know when to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_sponsor_slotsList sponsor slotsARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
List current availability. This tool never reserves or purchases a slot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| slots | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is established. The description adds value by stating 'never reserves or purchases a slot,' clarifying the exact side-effect-free behavior beyond what annotations convey. There is no contradiction with annotations.
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 short sentences, each earning its place. The first states the action, and the second clarifies the critical non-mutating nature. No fluff or redundancy.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters), the presence of an output schema, and strong annotations, the description is complete. It clarifies the tool's purpose and side-effect-free guarantee, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. The sibling tool name further contextualizes its role.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds context about what is being listed ('current availability'), which is semantically useful even though no parameters exist. Since there are no params, the description does not need to elaborate further.
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?
The description uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'current availability,' clearly indicating this tool is for read-only checking of sponsor slots. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from purchasing/reserving actions by stating it never reserves or purchases a slot, differentiating it from the sibling create_sponsor_checkout.
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 explicitly states when not to use this tool: 'This tool never reserves or purchases a slot.' This tells the agent that for reservation or purchase, it should look to other tools like the sibling create_sponsor_checkout. The guidance is clear and directly informs tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityFmaintenanceReal-time last-minute tour and activity booking across 18 suppliers in 15 countries via the OCTO open standard. Search available slots, create Stripe checkout sessions, and check booking status.41MIT
- Alicense-qualityBmaintenanceMCP server enabling AI agents to accept payments in France via Stripe hosted checkout. Provides tools for creating EUR payment links and checking payment status.MIT
- Alicense-qualityBmaintenanceLets any AI agent accept payments in Sweden via Stripe hosted checkout. Supports cards, Klarna, Apple Pay, and Google Pay through a stateless translation layer.MIT
- Alicense-qualityBmaintenanceLets AI agents accept payments in Slovakia via Stripe hosted checkout. Supports cards, Apple Pay, and Google Pay through a stateless translation layer.MIT