Skip to main content
Glama

Laso Finance

by finance.laso
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_agent_spend_limit

Read the per-payment spend limit

Returns the maximum the account owner allows for any single payment from the managed wallet: maxPerPaymentUsdc, plus the min, max, and default bounds it can be set within, all in whole USDC. The limit defaults to $1,000 and ranges from $1 to $50,000. It applies to every payment agentX402Pay makes, Laso routes and external url endpoints alike.

Check an amount against this before attempting a payment rather than waiting to be refused. Compare the fee-inclusive total, since fees are added on top of the amount you request. Read-only to an agent: only the account owner can change the limit, from the dashboard. If a payment would exceed it, do not split it into smaller payments. Stop and tell your human.

Free.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
auth_tokenNoLaso credential. Only if the MCP connection has no Authorization header.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "default": {
-      "description": "The limit that applies when the owner has never set one.",
-      "type": [
-        "number",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "max": {
-      "description": "The highest value the owner can set.",
-      "type": [
-        "number",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "maxPerPaymentUsdc": {
-      "description": "The most a single payment may total, fees included.",
-      "type": [
-        "number",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "min": {
-      "description": "The lowest value the owner can set.",
-      "type": [
-        "number",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is read-only, that it applies to all payment types (agentX402Pay, Laso routes, external url endpoints), the default and range, and that fees are added on top. It also explicitly warns against splitting payments. This is transparent and thorough for a read-only tool.

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 fairly long but each sentence adds valuable information: the return value, bounds, default, scope, and usage guidance. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. It is slightly wordy but not redundant, earning a 4.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description fully explains what is returned (maxPerPaymentUsdc plus min, max, default) and provides context (default $1,000, range $1–$50,000). It also covers the operational guidance and the read-only nature. For a read-only tool with a single optional parameter, this is complete; an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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

Parameters3/5

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

There is one parameter, auth_token, which is fully described in the schema ('Laso credential. Only if the MCP connection has no Authorization header.'). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond that. Since schema coverage is 100%, a baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description does not need to repeat parameter details.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Read the per-payment spend limit.' It specifies the exact resource (managed wallet's per-payment limit) and the key returned field (maxPerPaymentUsdc). The name and description are unambiguous, and it is distinct from sibling tools, which are mostly about other banking/payment operations.

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?

The description gives explicit guidance: check the limit before attempting a payment, compare fee-inclusive total, do not split payments that exceed the limit, and stop to tell the human. It also clarifies that the tool is read-only and only the owner can change the limit, which informs when it's appropriate to call. This is more than adequate for an agent to decide 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.

All Laso Finance toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources