agentcard

get_wallet_link

The user's hosted wallet, as one shareable URL. Opens their Agentcard wallet in the browser: every card in one place, add a debit/credit card, apply for an Agentcard card (identity verification runs right in the page). Mint it whenever the user needs a browser step — adding or seeing cards, finishing verification when in-chat photos fail — and send them the URL. Pass merchant + amount_cents to open the wallet ON the payment-approval sheet (the user picks a card and approves that exact charge) instead of the card list. Multi-use but short-lived (about 15 minutes — the exact moment is in expiresAt); mint a fresh one when it expires. Only works for app connections (OAuth); unavailable on personal logins.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`merchant`	No	Merchant name shown on the payment-approval sheet (with amount_cents).
`amount_cents`	No	Amount in cents. When present, the link opens on the payment-approval sheet for this charge.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	No	The hosted wallet URL to share with the user.
`message`	Yes	Ready-to-send sentence containing the URL.
`sandbox`	No	True when the connection is in test mode.
`expiresAt`	No	ISO time the link stops working.

Schema Changelog

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

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 14, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / amount_cents

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Amount in cents. When present, the link opens on the payment-approval sheet for this charge.",
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / merchant

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Merchant name shown on the payment-approval sheet (with amount_cents).",
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedAug 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With readOnlyHint and idempotentHint both false, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior, and it delivers: the link is multi-use but short-lived, expiresAt contains the exact expiry moment, a fresh link must be minted after expiry, and OAuth connectivity is required. It also documents the merchant+amount_cents conditional behavior that changes the landing mode, going well beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is dense yet efficient. It is front-loaded with the core concept, then gives use-case triggers, the parameter behavior, time-bound expiry, and the access restriction. Every sentence carries distinctive decision-relevant information; no filler or restatement of the schema.

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 the tool has only two optional parameters, a high-coverage schema, and an output schema, the description supplies the missing agent-relevant context: the actual use cases, the two modes, the expiry behavior, and the OAuth-only availability. It is complete enough for an agent to know when and how to call it, and to configure the optional params correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters and their formats. The description adds semantic context not in the schema: passing merchant and amount_cents together opens the wallet on the payment-approval sheet rather than the card list, and the merchant is shown directly on that sheet. This is useful behavioral meaning beyond pure type definitions.

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 identifies the tool as producing a shareable URL for the user's hosted wallet and explains what that URL opens in the browser. It distinguishes the two main display modes: the general card list and the payment-approval sheet, which makes its purpose specific and different from sibling tools like list_cards or list_added_cards.

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?

The description explicitly states when to mint the link (browser steps needed, adding/seeing cards, finishing verification when in-chat photos fail) and when to mint a fresh one (after 15-minute expiry). It also clearly excludes personal logins, saying it only works for OAuth app connections. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools, but the conditional guidance is strong.

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

All agentcard tools Inspect

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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, especially in areas like card management and shopping. However, the KYC flow has multiple overlapping tools (start_kyc, get_kyc_status, check_kyc_document, submit_kyc_document, submit_kyc_fields) that could confuse an agent despite detailed descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently use snake_case with a verb_noun pattern (e.g., add_funds, create_card, list_cards). A few exceptions like surprise_me and whoami break the pattern but are still intuitive overall.

Tool Count3/5

50 tools is on the high side for a single server, but the broad domain (cards, shopping, KYC, support, settings) partially justifies it. Some tools could be merged (e.g., KYC flow tools) without losing clarity.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers core workflows: CRUD for cards, transactions, KYC, support, shopping, and account management. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no update_card general, no cancel order in shopping), but overall the set is comprehensive for the stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?