Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Netfluid

by io.netfluid.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

netfluid__wallet_kyc_session_create

Creates a new session for Identity Verification (KYC), only required on wallet that have not been KYC verified. Do not generate a link unless explicitly asked for by the user. There is a cost per session.

Creates a session for Identity Verification. Do not generate a link unless explicitly asked for by the user. This endpoint will return a URL, direct the customer to that URL on their mobile. @param api_key: The api key allocated to your application @param token: The wallet_api_token provided by /access/login @param wallet_fk: The wallet_fk provided by /access/login @param profile: The session profile, values are FULL (ID verification, Face Verification, Liveness check, Email verification, AML) or LITE (ID verification, Face Verification, Email verification, AML) @param callback: The session callback URL which will be called with the verification result. This callback URL must call /callback/didit with the "verificationSessionId" and "status" as received on this callback url

@return: a json object

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tokenYes
api_keyYes
profileYes
callbackYes
wallet_fkYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
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 key traits: a per-session cost, that a URL is returned and the customer must be directed to it on mobile, and that the callback URL must subsequently hit /callback/didit with verificationSessionId and status. It omits session lifetime/expiry and error behavior, so it is strong but not complete.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The opening paragraph and the second paragraph duplicate each other almost verbatim ("Creates a session for Identity Verification" and the "Do not generate a link" instruction appear twice). The @param block is informative, but the redundant opening wastes space in an otherwise front-loaded description.

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 5-required-param mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, preconditions, cost, the URL-return behavior, and the callback flow. The return value is only described as "a json object" plus a URL, leaving some ambiguity about the response payload.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and largely does: it documents all five parameters, including the profile enum values (FULL vs LITE with their component checks) and the callback contract. token/wallet_fk are only described as "provided by /access/login," which is thinner but still points to their source.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Creates a new session for Identity Verification (KYC)") and adds a precondition ("only required on wallet that have not been KYC verified") that helps separate it from wallet_kyc_check siblings. It never names those siblings, but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

Gives both a when-to-use condition (wallets not yet KYC verified) and a when-not-to-act guardrail ("Do not generate a link unless explicitly asked for by the user"), plus a cost warning. No sibling alternative is named, so it falls 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 Netfluid 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