Skip to main content
Glama

pronto-stream

by io.github.nmxmxh
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

settle_payment

Idempotent

Redeem a payment you have made and activate what it bought — a plan, a pass or call credits. Step two of two, after open_payment and the transfer.

Prove the payment is yours: sign the SIGN message from open_payment with the paying wallet (personal_sign; smart wallets via ERC-1271) and pass it as signature. A transaction hash is public once mined, so without the signature anyone who saw your transfer could redeem it.

The payment is verified by reading Base: the transfer must have reached the settlement address, from the wallet this purchase was opened with, for at least the amount owed, and be five blocks deep. A payment that is real but not yet deep enough returns a pending error naming that — the money has moved, so do not pay again: it settles on its own once deep enough, and calling this again with the same hash reads the outcome. One transaction pays for one purchase, once.

On success your existing API key resolves to the new plan with nothing to change on your side: you become your own principal, and no person holds the subscription.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
signatureYes65-byte hex signature (0x…) from the paying wallet, made with personal_sign (EIP-191) over the SIGN message open_payment returned, with your lower-case transaction hash filled in. Smart-contract wallets are checked with ERC-1271.
transaction_hashYesThe Base transaction hash of your USDC transfer: 0x followed by 64 hex characters.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / signature
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "65-byte hex signature (0x…) from the paying wallet, made with personal_sign (EIP-191) over the SIGN message open_payment returned, with your lower-case transaction hash filled in. Smart-contract wallets are checked with ERC-1271.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "transaction_hash"
-]New value: +[
+  "transaction_hash",
+  "signature"
+]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the exact Base verification rules, the five-block depth requirement, the pending-error behavior, idempotent re-invocation, and the signature rationale. It also explains the success side effect on the API key.

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 front-loaded with purpose and then organized around signature, verification, pending behavior, and success. It is long, but the length is justified by the number of critical caveats and each paragraph earns its place.

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?

It covers prerequisites, verification conditions, pending errors, idempotency, and the successful outcome. With no output schema, however, the exact response/error shape is left implicit and failure cases such as bad signature or wrong sender are not enumerated.

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%, and the schema already documents the hex format, personal_sign/ERC-1271, the SIGN message, and the transaction hash format. The description reinforces these details but does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 first sentence states a specific action ('Redeem a payment') on a specific resource and the outcomes it activates: a plan, a pass, or call credits. 'Step two of two, after open_payment' clearly distinguishes it from the sibling open_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 places the tool in the flow: after open_payment and the transfer, and it gives retry guidance for pending payments. It does not explicitly enumerate alternatives or prohibitions beyond 'do not pay again', so the when-not-to-use edge is slightly implicit.

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

All pronto-stream toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources