Singularity Layer MCP

create_endpoint_with_payment

Create a new agent endpoint after you have obtained a valid X-Payment payload for the creation challenge. Requires a dashboard PAT with mcp:endpoints:write or mcp:*.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	No	Pricing mode
`name`	Yes	Human-readable endpoint name
`slug`	Yes	Unique slug for the new endpoint
`chain`	Yes	Primary payout network, usually base, solana, or both
`price`	No	Price per request or base package price
`category`	No	Marketplace category
`currency`	No	Payout currency, default USDC
`imageUrl`	No	Endpoint image URL
`bannerUrl`	No	Endpoint banner URL
`originUrl`	Yes	Origin URL of the endpoint backend
`webhookUrl`	No	Optional HTTPS webhook URL
`accessToken`	Yes	Your dashboard MCP personal access token (sgl_pat_*)
`description`	No	Endpoint description
`walletAddress`	Yes	Primary payout wallet address
`paymentPayload`	Yes	Raw X-Payment payload returned by the paying client, as JSON or base64 string
`purchaseAmount`	No	USDC amount to pay on creation, minimum 5
`listOnMarketplace`	No	Whether to list the endpoint publicly
`walletAddressSecondary`	No	Secondary wallet when chain is both

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses auth requirements and the payment payload prerequisite, which is valuable. However, it does not clarify whether the payment payload is consumed, whether the payment is executed immediately, or any side effects beyond creating the endpoint. The description could mention that this is a financial transaction requiring careful handling.

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?

Two focused sentences, front-loaded with the action and prerequisites. Every word earns its place—no fluff or repetition of schema content.

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?

Given 18 parameters and no output schema, the description provides only the critical prerequisites. It lacks context about the payment challenge flow (e.g., linking to request_endpoint_creation_payment) or what response to expect. The schema covers parameters, but the tool's complexity and financial nature could benefit from more workflow context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are fully documented there. The description adds minimal parameter semantics, only restating the payment payload prerequisite that already appears in the schema. It doesn't clarify how parameters like mode or chain interact, so it aligns with the baseline for a schema-rich tool.

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 clearly states 'Create a new agent endpoint' with specific prerequisites (valid X-Payment payload, PAT scope). The verb+resource is precise and differentiates from sibling tools like update_endpoint or delete_endpoint, and the payment context distinguishes it from other create operations.

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?

The description implies the sequential workflow: 'after you have obtained a valid X-Payment payload' signals that this tool should be used after a payment challenge flow (e.g., request_endpoint_creation_payment). It also states required permissions. However, it doesn't explicitly name the preceding tool or state when NOT to use this tool, leaving slight ambiguity.

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

All Singularity Layer MCP tools Inspect

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

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools pair a clear verb with a distinct resource noun, so endpoints, agents, datasets, campaigns, products, and vault operations are generally easy to separate. The main risk is the repeated request_*_payment / *_with_payment pairs and the two create_*_with_payment tools, which are only distinguishable by reading descriptions carefully.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant pattern is verb_noun snake_case, such as list_my_endpoints, update_campaign, and finalize_agent_registration, and the payment/request pairs are consistently named. The vault_* tools use a namespace prefix rather than verb-first names, and vault_how_to_backup breaks the action-oriented convention, so it is not perfectly uniform.

Tool Count2/5

48 tools is a very large MCP surface, well beyond the 25-tool threshold where selection becomes a serious burden. Even though the server spans multiple domains, the count feels excessive for a single agent-facing tool set and should likely be split by domain.

Completeness3/5

The core endpoint, agent, marketplace, and payment flows are well covered, including creation, updates, stats, and two-phase x402 purchases. However, there is no create_product or delete_product, campaigns lack delete, and there is no way to list previously purchased datasets, leaving notable lifecycle gaps.

Resources

Need Help?