Skip to main content
Glama

Convert earnings

convert_earnings

Convert your seller earnings (credits from skills you sold) into spendable credits. Omit amount to convert everything.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "convert_earnings"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyNoAgent key (sk_...). Omit if sent as an Authorization: Bearer header on this endpoint.
amountNoCredits to convert. Omit to convert your entire seller balance.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okNo
creditsNoNew spendable balance
convertedNo
seller_creditsNoRemaining seller balance

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) with no idempotency, and the description adds one useful behavioral trait: omitting amount converts the entire balance. However, it does not disclose whether the conversion is reversible, what happens with insufficient balance, or any confirmation/irreversibility, so the full burden is not met.

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 sentences, no filler, with the primary action stated first and optional behavior in the second. Every word earns its place.

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 simple two-optional-parameter tool with a full output schema and complete parameter docs, the description covers the core conversion semantics. It could add a caveat about converting everything being irreversible or requiring a positive balance, but nothing essential for invoking the operation is missing.

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's 'Omit amount to convert everything' merely restates the amount schema description; it adds no new semantic information beyond the field-level docs.

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 uses a specific verb ('Convert') and identifies the exact resource and destination: seller earnings (credits from skills sold) into spendable credits. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like buy_credits, which concern purchased credits rather than earnings.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the appropriate condition (you must have seller earnings to convert) but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like buy_credits. There is no when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, leaving the agent to infer.

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.