Skip to main content
Glama

update_my_global_payout

Set how the coach gets paid outside India: BANK (IBAN/SWIFT or account number), PAYPAL or WISE email. Sensitive — read the details back to the coach before confirming. (confirm-gated: previews until confirm: true)

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": {
      "input": "<input>"
    },
    "name": "update_my_global_payout"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes
confirmNoMust be true to actually execute. If false/omitted, returns a preview only.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds important behavior beyond the lone readOnlyHint=false annotation: this is sensitive payout data, the agent should read details back before confirming, and the tool previews until confirm:true. It does not document permissions or overwrite/reversibility behavior, but the confirmation workflow is well disclosed.

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?

Three compact sentences with the purpose, safety instruction, and confirmation gate front-loaded. There is no wasted text and the critical confirm behavior is easy to spot.

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 sensitive nested-object mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essential operational context: supported methods, field implications, sensitivity, and preview/confirm gating. Remaining gaps are mostly secondary field semantics and permission details.

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 schema has only 50% description coverage, but the description meaningfully clarifies method-dependent fields: BANK uses IBAN/SWIFT or account number, while PAYPAL/WISE use email. It does not explain supporting fields such as bankName, bankCountry, or accountHolderName, so it is strong but not complete.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Set how the coach gets paid outside India') and names the supported payout methods. The 'outside India' scope distinguishes it from local-bank or India-specific payout tools in the sibling list.

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 clearly establishes when the tool applies: global payout setup outside India, with method-specific requirements for BANK, PAYPAL, or WISE. It does not explicitly name an alternative for India payouts, but the scope condition is clear enough to route the agent.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.