Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

agent-tools (x402 + MCP + A2A directory)

by io.github.AgentTools-Cloud
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_paid_verification

Read-only

Read one of your own paid verifications.

Args:
    id: Verification id.
    api_key: Optional if the Authorization header is sent.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_paid_verification"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesVerification id.
api_keyNoOptional if the Authorization header is sent.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / api_key / description
      Added value: +"Optional if the Authorization header is sent."
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Added value: +"Verification id."
  2. Added

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral detail not in the annotations: the verification must belong to the caller ('your own'), plus the api_key/Authorization alternative. It says nothing about pagination, error behavior on a non-owned id, or return shape, though an output schema exists.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The first sentence is well-formed and front-loaded. The trailing Args block duplicates the input schema field-for-field and earns nothing, making the description larger than necessary.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-one lookup with an output schema and read-only annotations, an agent has enough to invoke it. What is missing is how to obtain a valid id (presumably from prepare_paid_verification) and what happens if the id belongs to another user – a real gap given the 'your own' scoping promise.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description's Args block merely repeats those descriptions verbatim. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does all the work and the description adds no format or id-acquisition detail.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one of your own paid verifications'), which clearly distinguishes it from the prepare_paid_verification and execute_paid_verification siblings. However it does not explicitly name those alternatives, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to retrieve a verification versus when to use prepare_ or execute_paid_verification, nor any prerequisite stated beyond the auth note. The 'your own' phrasing implies a scope constraint but the agent must infer the rest.

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

All agent-tools (x402 + MCP + A2A directory) toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources