Skip to main content
Glama

SaSame MCP Observatory + Gold Rush Town

by online.sasame

factory_checkout

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the retirement status of the legacy per-lifecycle Activation checkout rail. New Activation sales are closed. Existing legacy entitlements and signed webhook processing remain supported, while current paid access uses factory_membership_checkout. This tool never creates a Checkout and never charges.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
buyer_emailNoDeprecated compatibility input; ignored and never persisted
lifecycle_idNoDeprecated compatibility input; ignored
lifecycle_keyNoDeprecated compatibility input; ignored and never persisted
stripe_live_payment_acknowledgedNoDeprecated compatibility field. factory_start never charges, and public Activation checkout creation is closed.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / buyer_email / description
      Added value: +"Deprecated compatibility input; ignored and never persisted"
    • addedInput schema / properties / lifecycle_id / description
      Added value: +"Deprecated compatibility input; ignored"
    • addedInput schema / properties / lifecycle_key / description
      Added value: +"Deprecated compatibility input; ignored and never persisted"
    • changedInput schema / properties / stripe_live_payment_acknowledged / description
      Previous value: -"Required acknowledgement that completing the returned Checkout charges REAL money via Stripe LIVE mode at the owner-set activation price."New value: +"Deprecated compatibility field. factory_start never charges, and public Activation checkout creation is closed."
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "lifecycle_id",
-  "lifecycle_key",
-  "buyer_email",
-  "stripe_live_payment_acknowledged"
-]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / stripe_live_payment_acknowledged / description
      Previous value: -"Required acknowledgement that completing the returned Checkout charges REAL money via Stripe LIVE mode at the owner-set activation price. Reading tools never charges."New value: +"Required acknowledgement that completing the returned Checkout charges REAL money via Stripe LIVE mode at the owner-set activation price."
  4. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / stripe_live_payment_acknowledged
      Added value: +{
+  "const": true,
+  "description": "Required acknowledgement that completing the returned Checkout charges REAL money via Stripe LIVE mode at the owner-set activation price. Reading tools never charges.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / stripe_test_only_acknowledged
      Removed value: -{
-  "const": true,
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "lifecycle_id",
-  "lifecycle_key",
-  "buyer_email",
-  "stripe_test_only_acknowledged"
-]New value: +[
+  "lifecycle_id",
+  "lifecycle_key",
+  "buyer_email",
+  "stripe_live_payment_acknowledged"
+]
  5. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds that it never creates or charges, reinforcing but not adding beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Four concise sentences, each adding meaningful context. Front-loaded with main action. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given zero required params, no output schema, and simple read-only nature, description adequately covers legacy context and relationship to sibling tools.

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%, but parameters are deprecated and ignored. Description explains the tool never charges, which gives context for why parameters are ignored, but doesn't add significant value over schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states it reads retirement status of a legacy checkout rail. Distinguishes from sibling factory_membership_checkout by naming it as the current paid access tool.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (read retirement status of legacy Activation checkout) and when not (new sales closed, use factory_membership_checkout for current access).

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

All SaSame MCP Observatory + Gold Rush Town 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

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

With 94 tools spanning overlapping concepts (multiple readiness/audit/grade tools, many status checkers, deprecated aliases like trust_* vs observation_*), agents will frequently struggle to pick the right one. While each tool is individually distinct, the sheer volume and conceptual overlap (e.g., audit_mcp, readiness_report, verify_mcp_ready, lookup_readiness, recommend_mcp, subscribe_grade_changes) create high misselection risk.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use snake_case with underscores, but the pattern is inconsistent: some are verb-first (audit_mcp, verify_mcp_ready, claim_start, check_engagement) while others are noun-first (receipt_issue, meter_open, work_order_open, agent_invoice_status). Deprecated aliases like trust_compare vs observation_compare further break consistency, though the majority remain readable.

Tool Count1/5

94 tools is far beyond any reasonable scope for a single server, even one with broad ambitions like 'observatory + town'. The calibration notes 50+ as extreme mismatch; this server far exceeds that. Many tools are highly specific (e.g., factory_resolve_dead_letter, visit_touch_status, start_here) and could be consolidated or split into separate servers.

Completeness3/5

The server covers a wide range of domains (auditing, claiming, receipts, meters, escrow, work orders, gold rush, town, analytics) and offers many CRUD-like operations, but several lifecycle gaps exist: no cancel/close for work orders (only open/accept/deliver/accept_delivery), escrow (only open/attest/status), or meters (only open/charge/status). Given the massive scope, important operations are missing, though core workflows are present.

Resources