Skip to main content
Glama
Agnuxo1

PayPal Agentic Guardrail

by Agnuxo1

Related Servers

Alternatives to PayPal Agentic Guardrail

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to route PayPal money-moving requests through deterministic spending rules, AI injection and intent checks, human approvals, and tamper-evident audit logging.
      13 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables store owners to reorder from suppliers by voice or chat and settle payments through PayPal, while a deterministic policy engine enforces spending limits, allow-listed suppliers, price-jump and duplicate checks so the LLM can only propose payments, never move money. Funds are authorized rather than charged, then captured only for goods verified on delivery via a 3-way match, with step-up human approval for unusual orders and a full audit ledger of every authorization, capture, void and refund.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to use paid MCP tools within a human-approved budget by holding a PayPal sandbox authorization, checking each call against policy, recording usage in a durable ledger, and capturing or voiding the authorization at session close.
      2 npm
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables AI assistants to carry out PayPal payments, invoice recordings, and refunds through a fail-closed firewall that enforces spending limits and trusted recipients, cross-checks requests against account records, and screens for prompt injection. Unusual or unverifiable requests are halted and escalated to a human for approval before any execution.
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables AI agents to propose structured payment intents, apply deterministic policy, require human approval, and record tamper-evident audit trails without connecting to live payment rails.
      MIT

    TDQS

    A4.1/5.0

    Scored across 2 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    The two top-level tools have clearly distinct roles: one discovers authorised operations and their schemas, the other executes exactly one operation. Within run_payment_operation, the six embedded operations are also clearly differentiated by purpose and required identifiers.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: list_payment_operations and run_payment_operation. The embedded operation names also follow the same convention, making the set predictable.

    Tool Count4/5

    Only two top-level tools is slightly thin by usual MCP server standards, but the dispatcher pattern is appropriate for a guardrail server: discovery and execution are intentionally separated, and run_payment_operation encapsulates six distinct operations.

    Completeness4/5

    The surface covers the main payment lifecycle: charge, capture, show order, refund, supplier payout, and show payout. A minor gap is the lack of a way to list previously issued order, capture, or payout batch IDs, so agents must retain those IDs from prior responses.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues