Skip to main content
Glama

Laso Finance

by finance.laso
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

list_payment_recipients

List saved Venmo and PayPal recipients (free)

Lists the Venmo or PayPal recipients this account has paid before, so you can resolve a name your human said ("send $20 to Jane") into the handle that GET /send-payment takes as its recipient_id. Free — only the payout itself is a paid action.

Two different ids are in play. Each entry's recipient_id is an opaque saved-entry id: pass it to POST and DELETE /payment-recipients. Its handle is the phone number or email you actually pay: pass that as recipient_id to GET /send-payment. Passing the saved-entry id to GET /send-payment does not send to the saved person.

Use total_sent and last_sent_timestamp to disambiguate similar names, and confirm with your human rather than guessing between two entries.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
platformYesPayment platform whose saved recipients to list.
auth_tokenNoLaso credential. Only if the MCP connection has no Authorization header.
include_archivedNoInclude archived entries. Defaults to false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / platform / description
      Added value: +"Payment platform whose saved recipients to list."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / platform / description
      Removed value: -"Payment platform whose saved recipients to list."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "platform": {
-      "description": "One of: venmo, paypal.",
-      "type": [
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "recipients": {
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "display_name": {
-            "description": "The label the account owner chose. Prefer it when confirming a payment back to a human.",
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "handle": {
-            "description": "What to pay them at: a 10-digit phone number for Venmo, an email address for PayPal. Pass this as `recipient_id` to `GET /send-payment`.",
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "last_sent_timestamp": {
-            "description": "Milliseconds since the epoch.",
-            "type": [
-              "number",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "name": {
-            "description": "The recipient's own name on the platform.",
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "recipient_id": {
-            "description": "Opaque id of this saved entry (for example `aQ3xK9mZpL2vB7nR4tYw`). Pass it as `recipient_id` to `POST` and `DELETE /payment-recipients`. It is not what `GET /send-payment` takes; use `handle` there.",
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "send_count": {
-            "type": [
-              "number",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "status": {
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "total_sent": {
-            "description": "Total dollars sent to this recipient from this account.",
-            "type": [
-              "number",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          }
-        },
-        "type": [
-          "object",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "type": [
-        "array",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "user_id": {
-      "type": [
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses that the operation is free, that two distinct ids exist, that the saved-entry recipient_id must not be passed to send-payment, and that total_sent/last_sent_timestamp help disambiguate entries.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The definition is front-loaded, compact, and every sentence earns its place: free call, use case, id warning, and disambiguation guidance. The formatting with paragraphs and inline code makes the trap easy to notice.

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?

For a list tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it names the output fields an agent needs (recipient_id, handle, total_sent, last_sent_timestamp), explains how they relate to send_payment endpoints, and warns about the common id-misuse failure. The required/enum parameters are already in the schema.

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?

The input schema already documents all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds important meaning beyond the schema, especially that recipients are limited to those previously paid and that the entry's handle (not recipient_id) is what send-payment consumes. It doesn't add new detail for auth_token or include_archived, but those were already covered.

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 states a specific verb ('list'), a specific resource ('saved Venmo or PayPal recipients'), and a scoping condition ('this account has paid before'). It distinguishes this tool from banking-address or generic listing siblings by naming both platforms and the downstream purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives clear context: use it before a payment to resolve a human-provided name into the handle that GET /send-payment expects. It doesn't explicitly enumerate alternatives or when not to use it, but the naming and 'so you can' framing make the intended trigger unambiguous.

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