Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

lesgooo.fun

by fun.lesgooo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Record a payment

record_payment

Records that the participant has already paid someone back (settling up); the amount defaults to what they owe that person. It records a completed payment only and moves no money. Use when the user says the money was actually sent.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
planYesSaved plan link (e.g. https://lesgooo.fun/ab12/when) or its 4-character plan ID. Links without a plan ID (e.g. https://lesgooo.fun/when) are unsaved local drafts and are not accepted.
amountNoOptional; defaults to the suggested settle-up amount.
participant_idYesFrom create_plan or join_plan.
allow_duplicateNoOnly if the user confirms a second, identical payment within 10 minutes (otherwise it is treated as a retry).
participant_tokenYesFrom create_plan or join_plan.
to_participant_idYesWho received the money (participant_id, or their exact name).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / plan / description
      Previous value: -"Saved plan link (e.g. https://lesgooo.fun/ab12/when) or its 4-character id. Bare module links such as https://lesgooo.fun/when are local drafts: ask for a saved link, never substitute a previous plan ID."New value: +"Saved plan link (e.g. https://lesgooo.fun/ab12/when) or its 4-character plan ID. Links without a plan ID (e.g. https://lesgooo.fun/when) are unsaved local drafts and are not accepted."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / plan / description
      Previous value: -"Plan link (e.g. https://lesgooo.fun/ab12/when) or its 4-character id."New value: +"Saved plan link (e.g. https://lesgooo.fun/ab12/when) or its 4-character id. Bare module links such as https://lesgooo.fun/when are local drafts: ask for a saved link, never substitute a previous plan ID."
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / allow_duplicate
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only if the user confirms a second, identical payment within 10 minutes (otherwise it is treated as a retry).",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / to_participant_id / description
      Previous value: -"Who received the money (participant_id)."New value: +"Who received the money (participant_id, or their exact name)."
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it clarifies that this is bookkeeping only and moves no money, which meaningfully reinforces destructiveHint=false and prevents an agent from assuming a transfer occurs. It does not discuss the duplicate/retry semantics that annotations flag via idempotentHint=false, leaving that to the schema.

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 key constraint (already paid / no money moves) is front-loaded, and every clause contributes: the concept, the amount default, the completed-only restriction, and the trigger phrase. No filler or repetition.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a mutating tool with annotations covering the safety profile and a fully documented schema, the description supplies the trigger condition and the no-money-moved guarantee. The only gap is that, with no output schema, it never hints at what is returned or how the recorded payment appears afterward.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented. The description only restates the amount default ('defaults to what they owe that person'), paraphrasing the schema's 'suggested settle-up amount' without adding format or edge-case detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('records that the participant has already paid someone back'), and the parenthetical 'settling up' makes the settlement concept unambiguous. It implicitly separates this from recording a new expense ('moves no money'), though it never names the sibling add_expense, so differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.

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?

'Use when the user says the money was actually sent' is a concrete, quotable trigger condition, and 'records a completed payment only' effectively states the negative case (not for planned or pending payments). It stops short of naming an alternative tool for the not-yet-sent case, which would have made this a 5.

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

All lesgooo.fun toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Pay for results, not tokens.Fund a bounty. Let AI agents compete and collaborate to solve your problems.agentbounties.appAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources