Skip to main content
Glama

Verifly

by email.verifly

Buy credits (returns a payment link or crypto invoice)

buy_credits

Start a purchase of a credit package and return a way to pay. This does NOT complete a payment by itself — it returns a payment link / address: • method 'stripe' → returns a checkout_url. Paying by card requires a HUMAN to open that link and enter card details; an agent cannot finish a card payment on its own. • method 'crypto' → returns a Plisio invoice with a checkout_url AND, when you pass a currency (BTC, ETH, LTC, USDT, USDC), a RAW wallet address + amount. An autonomous agent CAN pay this from a crypto wallet with no browser/human, then credits are added automatically once the payment confirms. Prefer crypto for fully autonomous top-ups. Get a package id from get_packages first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
methodNoPayment method. 'stripe' = card link (needs a human), 'crypto' = wallet-payable invoice. Default 'stripe'.
currencyNoFor method 'crypto': the coin to pay in; returns a raw wallet address an agent can pay autonomously.
package_idYesThe package id to buy (from get_packages).

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses that stripe requires human interaction, crypto returns raw address/amount for auto-payment, and credits are added automatically upon confirmation. No annotations exist to contradict.

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?

Well-structured with bullet points, informative without being verbose. All sentences add value. Slightly long but justified by complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema, but description details what each method returns. Covers prerequisites and explains autonomous vs human payment adequately.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds significant value by explaining payment flow per method and the purpose of currency parameter beyond enum labels.

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?

Clearly states it starts a purchase and returns a payment link/invoice, not completing payment. Distinguishes from siblings like get_packages and get_credits.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly explains when to use stripe vs crypto, that stripe needs a human, and crypto is for autonomous agents. Also advises to get package_id from get_packages first.

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

All Verifly toolsInspect
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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose. Overlaps like verify_batch vs submit_bulk are explicitly differentiated by synchronous vs asynchronous behavior. Extraction, cleaning, verification, and management tools are well-separated.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., register_account, verify_email, get_job_status). There is no mixing of conventions or vague verbs.

Tool Count5/5

15 tools cover the domain of email verification and account management without redundancy. Each tool fills a specific role—single verification, batch sync, bulk async, job polling, results retrieval, list cleaning, extraction, domain health, credit purchasing, and account management.

Completeness5/5

The tool set provides complete lifecycle coverage: account registration, usage tracking, credit purchase, email verification (single, batch, bulk with async), job management, list cleaning, email extraction, and domain health checks. No obvious gaps for the intended functionality.

Resources