Skip to main content
Glama

Molt2Meet

by io.github.molt2meet-org

Fund Wallet

fund_wallet

Add funds to your wallet via secure payment provider. Returns a checkout URL where you or your user can complete the payment. After successful payment, the wallet is automatically credited. Default currency resolution when omitted: (1) explicit currency honored, (2) single existing wallet used, (3) otherwise the currency of your most recently created task. If none available → error asking you to pass currency explicitly. No stale USD default. Requires authentication.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
amountYesAmount to deposit
apiKeyYesYour API key (m2m_...)
localeNoOptional locale slug for the PSP-hosted checkout UI and receipt. Supported: en, nl, de, fr, es, es-419, pt, pt-BR, it, pl. Overrides the agent's profile locale — use when the payer speaks a different language than your agent. Defaults to the agent's profile locale, then to browser auto-detect.
currencyNoCurrency code (USD, EUR, etc.). Omit for smart default based on existing wallets / recent tasks.
successUrlNoReturn URL after PSP payment

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / locale
      Added value: +{
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Optional locale slug for the PSP-hosted checkout UI and receipt. Supported: en, nl, de, fr, es, es-419, pt, pt-BR, it, pl. Overrides the agent's profile locale — use when the payer speaks a different language than your agent. Defaults to the agent's profile locale, then to browser auto-detect.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: it explains the currency resolution algorithm, the fact that the wallet is credited automatically after payment, and the error condition when no currency is available. It also explicitly states 'No stale USD default', which is a useful non-obvious behavior. The annotations only indicate basic hints, so the description carries the transparency burden well.

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?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. It uses five sentences, each conveying necessary information, including the checkout URL, automatic crediting, currency resolution, and the no-stale-default note. There is minimal waste, though the final 'Requires authentication' is already implied by the apiKey parameter, slightly lengthening it.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description's mention of returning a checkout URL is essential and adequately covers the return value. It also covers the payment lifecycle and currency edge cases. It does not discuss idempotency or URL expiration, but given the simplicity of the tool and the annotations provided, it is sufficiently complete.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters, which sets a baseline of 3. The description goes further by explaining the smart default resolution for the currency parameter in exact order, and the error behavior if no currency is determined. This adds meaningful guidance beyond the schema's simple 'Omit for smart default' note.

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 the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Add funds') and resource ('your wallet'), and specifies the key output (checkout URL). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fund_task by focusing on wallet funding rather than task funding, and from checkout_wallet_deposit by describing the automatic crediting after 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?

The description provides clear context on when to use the tool: when you need to add funds to a wallet via a payment provider. It also details the currency default resolution order, which helps users decide when to omit the currency parameter. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Molt2Meet 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but there are overlapping pairs like fund_wallet and checkout_wallet_deposit (both create checkout URLs for wallet top-up) and cancel_physical_task vs cancel_task_with_settlement. Detailed descriptions and cross-references help, but the sheer number of similar actions creates misselection risk.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., get_*, list_*, approve_*). Minor deviations include inconsistent use of 'task' vs 'physical_task' in names and the awkward 'checkout_wallet_deposit', but overall the pattern is predictable.

Tool Count2/5

54 tools is excessive for any server, even a complex platform. While each tool has a role, many are redundant or could be consolidated (e.g., wallet funding tools, multiple approval/cancel variations), making the set feel bloated and hard to navigate.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the full task lifecycle, escrow/direct settlement flows, wallet management, webhooks, support, and administrative functions. The only notable gap is the inability to update task details beyond location (description, deadline, etc.) after dispatch, but core workflows are well-covered.

Resources