Skip to main content
Glama

corply

by io.github.corply-dev

request_payment

MANDATORY before any signing: prepare (or reuse) the checkout link for the one-time Corply incorporation fee. Two tiers, and the ONLY difference is how long registered agent is covered: registeredAgent='year_one' is $449 (Essential: formation plus the first year of registered agent), registeredAgent='lifetime' is $799 (formation plus registered agent for the life of the company). Ask the founder which they want before calling; default to year_one if they do not care, because they can upgrade later for $350 at any time via request_registered_agent_upgrade with nothing lost. Optionally include Corply Mail in the SAME Stripe checkout: corplyMail='annual' includes 365 days, then renews at $119/year; corplyMail='monthly' includes 365 days, then renews at $15/month; corplyMail='none' creates no recurring mail subscription. Before selecting annual or monthly, disclose the exact renewal price, that Stripe stores the payment method, and that the founder can cancel in Billing. Never infer consent; default to none. Promo codes are accepted on year_one only. Show the returned checkoutUrl to the founder in chat as a markdown link — creating the link needs no confirmation; the founder chooses whether to Pay in the browser. Only the lead founder pays, once per company; cofounders never pay, and editing/regenerating documents never re-charges. Safe to re-call: it reuses the open session, and switching tier retires the old link and issues the right one. Prerequisite: authenticated active organization access plus every prerequisite stated above. Canonicality: invokes the shared backend action; trust the returned actual_tool_output and context_engineering instead of adding a state-recovery call. Idempotency: obey the tool-specific retry key or guarantee; if none is stated, inspect refreshed state before retrying. Confirmation boundary: no additional confirmation is needed for this read, reversible save, explicit fact/evidence record, link preparation, plan refresh, or action pre-authorized by a standing founder-configured policy.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
corplyMailNoExplicit renewal choice after disclosure. Defaults to none; annual is $119/year after 365 included days, monthly is $15/month.
formationIdYes
_corply_contextNoEcho context_engineering.context_session from the prior Corply result.
registeredAgentNoyear_one = $449 total. lifetime = $799 total. Defaults to year_one.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, it discloses that the call creates or reuses an active Stripe checkout session, that switching tiers retires the old link, that no confirmation is needed to create the link, that only the lead founder pays once, and that Stripe stores the payment method with renewal/cancellation details. No contradiction with readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false.

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 content is extremely dense and relevant, but it is delivered as one long paragraph with generic closing boilerplate (Canonicality/Idempotency/Confirmation boundary) that could be trimmed or bulleted. It is front-loaded with the core purpose but not concise.

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 payment-link tool with no output schema, it covers prerequisites, consent/disclosure duties, pricing, idempotency/re-call behavior, founder eligibility, and explicit output handling. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema coverage is 75%, the description adds substantial meaning: exact dollar amounts for registeredAgent values, the $350 upgrade path, promo-code restriction to year_one, renewal pricing for corplyMail, and the default-to-none consent rule. It also names the returned checkoutUrl, helping the agent interpret the output.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'prepare (or reuse) the checkout link' for the one-time incorporation fee, and positions it as mandatory before signing. It explicitly names a sibling (request_registered_agent_upgrade) so the agent can distinguish upgrade from initial payment.

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 states when the tool is required ('MANDATORY before any signing'), how to choose between tier options, and that the upgrade path is a separate sibling tool. It does not explicitly contrast request_payment with the many other payment-related siblings, but the mandatory-before-signing context is strong enough for correct selection.

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

All corply toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

There is notable overlap among status/read tools (get_company_briefing, get_status, get_org, whoami) and a dense cluster of payment-related tools (request_payment, await_payment, create_payment_project, create_payment_route_draft, etc.). The detailed descriptions help differentiate them, but agents could still misselect when the surface is this large.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names overwhelmingly follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., create_payment_route_draft, record_operating_event, start_bank_onboarding). Minor exceptions like 'whoami', 'recall', and 'remember' are acceptable single-verb commands, so the naming is highly consistent overall.

Tool Count2/5

At 52 tools, the server far exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many'. While the breadth of domains (formation, payments, cap table, operating compliance) somewhat justifies the count, it still feels heavy and likely increases selection errors and cognitive load for agents.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the full formation lifecycle (save, validate, generate, sign, submit), payment handling, bank onboarding, cap table management, and operating records/evidence workflows. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no update/delete for existing companies, no explicit company dissolution), but the core workflows are well covered.

Resources