Solana Trading & Live Data — PumpView

get_invoice_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read one of your account's existing invoices without creating or paying another.

    Bearer key required; no package or data credits needed. Returns payer,
    recipient, exact atomic USDC amount, memo, expires (Unix seconds) and paid.
    paid=false means not yet settled by PumpView, not proof of no on-chain payment.
    If your wallet already broadcast, use confirm_invoice_payment with that signature.
    Do not pay again while waiting. Missing or another account's invoice returns 404.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`invoice_id`	Yes	Invoice id returned by get_payment_instructions for this API-key account. Not a swap id or Solana transaction signature.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Invoice ID for prepare_invoice_payment, get_invoice_status and confirm_invoice_payment.
`memo`	Yes	Exact payment memo binding the transaction to this invoice.
`mint`	Yes	Native Solana USDC mint address required for this payment.
`paid`	Yes	Whether the invoice has been settled. A newly created invoice is unpaid.
`plan`	Yes	Selected plan ID from the current public plan catalog.
`payer`	Yes	Linked Solana wallet that must authorize payment.
`amount`	Yes	Exact invoice amount in USDC atomic units; divide by 10^decimals for USDC.
`created`	Yes	Invoice creation time as Unix seconds.
`expires`	Yes	Invoice expiry as Unix seconds; do not pay an expired invoice.
`network`	Yes	Required payment network: solana-mainnet.
`decimals`	Yes	USDC decimals: 6.
`recipient`	Yes	Public payment recipient to verify before signing.
`payment_protocol`	Yes	Payment workflow identifier: pumpview-invoice-v1.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: bearer key auth requirement, no data credits consumed, the meaning of paid=false (not settled by PumpView, not proof of no on-chain payment), and the 404 behavior. The paid=false caveat is a genuine semantic nuance an agent could otherwise misread.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, and nearly every sentence carries operational value (auth, cost, non-payment warning). Slight deduction because enumerating the returned fields (payer, recipient, amount, memo, expires, paid) partially duplicates the output schema.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies exactly the remaining gaps: auth, credit cost, the paid=false interpretation, and the escalation path to confirm_invoice_payment. Nothing needed to call this correctly is missing.

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% and the schema itself carries the important disambiguation ('Not a swap id or Solana transaction signature') plus a regex pattern and example. The description adds nothing further about invoice_id, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one of your account's existing invoices') and immediately scopes it against adjacent operations ('without creating or paying another'), which cleanly separates it from prepare_invoice_payment and confirm_invoice_payment. An agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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?

Explicit routing rules are given: if the wallet already broadcast, use confirm_invoice_payment with that signature; do not pay again while waiting. It also names the failure condition (missing or another account's invoice returns 404), so both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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

All Solana Trading & Live Data — PumpView tools Inspect

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

Need Help?