Skip to main content
Glama

webaz_place_order

Destructive

Buyer places order. Buyer api_key required.

Payment rail (choose explicitly at purchase):

  • direct_p2p (live, non-custodial direct pay): buyer pays the seller directly OFF-platform via the seller's chosen receiving account. Order amount is the protocol/base amount; the payable DISPLAY follows that account's declared currency/instruction (USDC only when the account is USDC/USD — otherwise the seller's currency, "以收款说明为准"). WebAZ does NOT custody, route, validate, or restrict the method/currency. Pass direct_receive_account_id. Eligibility is enforced by the SERVER; ineligible → the route's own gate error.

  • usdc_escrow (on-chain escrow, USDC on Base): funds enter the escrow contract; buyer deposits via wallet on the order page after create. Channel-gated — server rejects when off.

  • Any unavailable rail, an omitted rail, or the compatibility-only escrow input is rejected. Never auto-switch rails.

usdc_escrow timing: create returns pay_deadline_hours; deadlines re-anchor after on-chain deposit; NO in-protocol fault/compensation — after autoReleaseAt anyone may trigger release to the seller unless disputed on-chain.

Options:

  • B1 cross-border tax: server auto-estimates duty (seller's est_import_duty_pct × price)

  • B2 privacy: anonymous_recipient=true → PR-XXXXX alias on shipping label

  • B5 donation: donation_pct 0 / 0.5 / 1 / 2 / 5% → charity_fund

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesNoNote to seller (optional)
api_keyNoBuyer's api_key (or omit and set the WEBAZ_API_KEY env var)
offer_idNoRFC-032 negotiated offer (off_…) the seller bound to YOUR human. Exclusive with session_token/coupon/multi-SKU. You never send a price: the server reads it as min(offer, listing), never above the offer. An id, not a credential — another human's grant gets OFFER_MISMATCH. NETWORK only; 404 FEATURE_DISABLED while the flag is off; 409 OFFER_INVALID/EXPIRED/USED/MISMATCH/VOID/NO_COUPON. Agents consume, never issue.
quantityNoQuantity, default 1
product_idYesProduct ID to buy (from webaz_search)
donation_pctNo[B5] Per-order donation pct (0 / 0.5 / 1 / 2 / 5). Computed separately + into charity_fund, posted on order complete.
payment_railNoPayment rail — pass one explicitly. "direct_p2p" (live, non-custodial): you pay the seller off-platform per their receiving account (USDC only as base/reference amount; WebAZ doesn't custody/route/validate currency) — requires direct_receive_account_id; the server runs all eligibility gates (you do not). "usdc_escrow" (on-chain escrow, USDC on Base): funds go to the escrow contract; buyer deposits via wallet on the order page; channel-gated — server rejects when off. The compatibility-only "escrow" input and an omitted rail are rejected.
session_tokenNoPrice-lock session_token (recommended): from webaz_verify_price; guarantees order price = displayed price
digital_deliveryNoGame currency: buyer_fields, no address; the owner confirms ban risk on webaz.xyz
promoter_api_keyNoReferrer api_key (optional). ⚠️ Only L1 recorded (direct referrer, 70% commission); L2/L3 can't be inferred via MCP, so the undelivered L2/L3 portions go to commission_reserve (protocol reserve, in-only). Full 7:2:1 three-tier chain requires buyer clicking ?ref= URL from webaz_share_link (creates product_share_attribution).
shipping_addressNoShipping address (free text). OMIT to use your saved default — resolved inside the call, never shown to agents. No default saved → ADDRESS_REQUIRED.
anonymous_recipientNo[B2] Anonymous recipient: system generates PR-XXXXX alias instead of real name (seller label shows alias + address only)
direct_receive_account_idNoFor payment_rail="direct_p2p": the seller's direct-receive account id to pay. Ignored on non-direct rails.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond annotations: non-custodial direct_p2p payment, on-chain escrow mechanics, post-deposit deadline re-anchoring, absence of in-protocol fault/compensation, and server-enforced eligibility. These are meaningful traits for a destructive/open-world purchase operation.

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 long but appropriately structured with bullets and front-loaded key requirements. Some rail details duplicate schema descriptions, but the density is justified by the tool's complexity.

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 13-parameter financial mutation tool, the description covers the critical rails, options, timing, and failure behavior. It could be strengthened by briefly describing the return value beyond pay_deadline_hours, since no output schema exists.

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 parameter meanings are already well documented. The description reinforces rail and option semantics but adds little that the schema does not already provide.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Buyer places order', with an explicit api_key requirement. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools such as webaz_buy or webaz_quote_order.

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 gives clear guidance on selecting a payment rail, rejecting omitted or unavailable rails, and never auto-switching. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool instead of sibling purchase-related tools.

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.

Resources