Skip to main content
Glama

AgentPay (Russia)

by io.github.zapnikita95

create_topup_intent

Ask the owner to top up coins (opens YooKassa or cabinet). Call on INSUFFICIENT_FUNDS when auto-topup did not cover the purchase. Never take a card in chat. Never enable auto-topup yourself. Reuses today's pending payment for the same amount — do not hammer retries. If get_payment_status shows pending, wait instead of calling again. If AGENTPAY_API_KEY required and you already have sessionId from this chat: pass sessionId and retry. Never begin_agent_link again. Never ask the owner to edit connector settings or reconnect. Never web-search.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
amountRubNoTop-up amount in RUB
needCoinsNoCoins needed; server computes deficit
sessionIdNoOptional. Agent-link sessionId from begin_agent_link / poll_agent_link. Pass on every tool when connector has no Authorization Bearer (Grok/ChatGPT/Claude). After status=approved this authenticates as als_<sessionId>. Never invent a sessionId. Never ask the owner to open Authorization settings (Grok has none).

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / sessionId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. Agent-link sessionId from begin_agent_link / poll_agent_link. Pass on every tool when connector has no Authorization Bearer (Grok/ChatGPT/Claude). After status=approved this authenticates as als_<sessionId>. Never invent a sessionId. Never ask the owner to open Authorization settings (Grok has none).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / sessionId
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Optional. Agent-link sessionId from begin_agent_link / poll_agent_link. Pass on every tool when connector has no Authorization Bearer (Grok/ChatGPT/Claude). After status=approved this authenticates as als_<sessionId>. Never invent a sessionId. Never ask the owner to open Authorization settings (Grok has none).",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / sessionId / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. Agent-link sessionId from begin_agent_link / poll_agent_link. Pass on every tool when connector has no Authorization Bearer (Grok/ChatGPT/Claude). After status=approved this authenticates as als_<sessionId>. Never invent a sessionId. Never ask the owner to reconnect."New value: +"Optional. Agent-link sessionId from begin_agent_link / poll_agent_link. Pass on every tool when connector has no Authorization Bearer (Grok/ChatGPT/Claude). After status=approved this authenticates as als_<sessionId>. Never invent a sessionId. Never ask the owner to open Authorization settings (Grok has none)."
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / sessionId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional. Agent-link sessionId from begin_agent_link / poll_agent_link. Pass on every tool when connector has no Authorization Bearer (Grok/ChatGPT/Claude). After status=approved this authenticates as als_<sessionId>. Never invent a sessionId. Never ask the owner to reconnect.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations are minimal (only readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so the description carries the disclosure burden. It discloses external side effects (opens YooKassa/cabinet), payment reuse behavior ("Reuses today's pending payment for the same amount"), authentication requirements for sessionId, and strong prohibitions like "Never take a card in chat" and "Never enable auto-topup yourself." No contradiction with annotations.

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 the core purpose and trigger, and nearly every sentence carries an actionable rule. However, it is a dense run-on sequence of 'Never' prohibitions that would be easier to scan as grouped constraints or bullets. It is still compact relative to the complexity of the payment/auth flow.

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 payment tool with no output schema and sparse annotations, the description covers trigger conditions, retry behavior, pending payment reuse, auth handling, and security boundaries. The main gaps are the ambiguous amountRub-vs-needCoins choice and the lack of explicit post-success flow, though get_payment_status is referenced as the monitoring path. Overall, it is quite complete for its complexity.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds some useful context, such as passing sessionId only when AGENTPAY_API_KEY is required and retrying with it instead of calling begin_agent_link. However, it does not clarify the relationship between amountRub and needCoins when both are optional and required=0, leaving ambiguity about which parameter to supply or how the server reconciles both.

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 opens with a concrete verb and resource: "Ask the owner to top up coins" and the mechanism "opens YooKassa or cabinet." It also pins the trigger to "INSUFFICIENT_FUNDS when auto-topup did not cover the purchase," which clearly separates this tool from purchase, payment-status, and agent-link siblings. An agent can immediately tell what this tool is for.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives an explicit call condition (INSUFFICIENT_FUNDS after auto-topup failure), explicit alternatives (wait when get_payment_status shows pending), and explicit exclusions (never begin_agent_link again, never ask owner to edit connectors, never web-search). It also warns against hammering retries, which is exactly the kind of usage guardrail an agent needs.

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

All AgentPay (Russia) 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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource or action—get_* tools for financial/status lookups, search/get_product for catalog access, create_purchase for buying—but a few pairs share triggers. peek_stores and search_products can be triggered by the same phrases, and get_faq vs get_recovery_guide both address failure/error explanations, relying on the long descriptions to differentiate them.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: get_* for read operations, create_/save_/update_/set_ for mutations, list_* for collection queries, and begin_/poll_/verify_ for the connection flow. No mixed casing or arbitrary verb variance is present.

Tool Count3/5

26 tools is on the heavy side, especially for a payment/shopping MCP server. While the domain is broad—auth, wallet, catalog, preferences, policies, purchases, recovery—some tools could be consolidated (e.g., peek_stores/search_products, get_faq/get_recovery_guide) without losing clarity.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the full shopping/payment lifecycle: discovery, search, comparison, purchase, payment status, top-up, balance, limits, spending policy, address management, and connection recovery. Minor gaps exist—no explicit refund/cancel purchase tool and no preference deletion—but these can be worked around or are intentionally absent.

Resources