Skip to main content
Glama

Create refund

numeral_create_refund
Destructive

RECORDS a refund against a transaction — this WRITES a live tax/compliance record (adjusts tax owed). Use type="full" to refund the whole transaction, or type="partial" with line_items (each keyed by reference_product_id) for a partial refund. Numeral: POST /tax/refunds.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYes"full" refunds the whole transaction; "partial" requires line_items.
line_itemsNoRequired for type="partial": the line items to refund.
transaction_idYesThe transaction id (tr_...) to refund.
refund_processed_atNoUnix timestamp (SECONDS) the refund was made. Defaults to now if omitted.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Explicitly states the tool WRITES a live tax/compliance record and adjusts tax owed, which supplements the destructiveHint annotation, adding clarity about the real-world impact.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the purpose, then provide usage details. No unnecessary words.

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?

No output schema, and the description does not mention return value. However, the description is otherwise complete for invocation decisions, and the API endpoint hint helps.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the description adds little beyond summarizing the type enum and line_items usage. The baseline is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('RECORDS a refund against a transaction') and distinguishes between full and partial refunds, differentiating it from sibling tools like numeral_create_transaction.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use type='full' vs. type='partial' with line_items. Does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear enough for typical usage.

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.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose with no overlap. Tax calculations, product/customer management, transaction recording, refunds, and health check are clearly separated.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use a consistent 'numeral_verb_noun' pattern with snake_case. Verbs are standard (calculate, create, get, list, ping) and maintain predictability.

Tool Count5/5

11 tools cover the core functionalities of tax calculation, product/customer management, transaction recording, and refunds without unnecessary extras.

Completeness3/5

Core CRUD is incomplete: missing lists for customers and transactions, and no update/delete endpoints. While key workflows are covered, significant operational gaps exist.