WHP Standing

whp_retrieve_result

Retrieve a previously issued Standing Mark Record by purchase_id without triggering a second x402 payment charge.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "purchase_id": "<purchase_id>"
    },
    "name": "whp_retrieve_result"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`purchase_id`	Yes	The 64-character hex purchase_id of the completed examination.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`envelope`	No
`http_status`	Yes
`purchase_id`	Yes
`record_found`	Yes
`second_charge_applied`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the single most consequential non-obvious trait: calling it will not incur a second x402 payment. It omits what happens for an unknown, expired, or unpaid purchase_id, and gives no sense of the failure mode, which matters for a tool keyed on a payment receipt.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource and closes with the differentiator (no second charge). Nothing is wasted and nothing important is buried.

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 is simple, has one parameter fully documented, and an output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. What is missing is error/edge behavior for invalid purchase_ids and any disambiguation from the similarly named standing-result sibling.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already defines the 64-character hex pattern and ties purchase_id to a completed examination, so the description adds no format or validation detail beyond it. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (Retrieve) and resource (Standing Mark Record) plus the lookup key, so the agent knows exactly what it gets back. It does not, however, distinguish this from the sibling whp_standing_result, which appears to target the same resource and is only separable by name inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'previously issued' and 'purchase_id' signal it should be used after a completed examination, and 'without triggering a second x402 payment charge' hints it replaces a paid re-fetch. No explicit when-not condition or named alternative (e.g., whp_recover_purchase, whp_standing_result) is given, leaving the agent to infer routing.

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

All WHP Standing tools Inspect

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.