Paddle MCP Server

Official

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

replay_simulation_run_event

Resend a specific event from a Paddle simulation run using its ID to retest individual event delivery without creating a new simulation run.

Instructions

This tool will resend an event sent by a simulation run from Paddle using its ID.

This is useful to retest the sending of an individual event within a simulation run rather than creating a new simulation run and sending all events again.

Paddle creates a new simulation run event entity for the replay, related to the same simulation run.

If successful, the response includes the new simulation run event entity.

Check the following details to understand the success or failure of the event according to Paddle and debug issues:

status: Status of the event according to Paddle.
- pending: No attempt has been made to deliver the event yet.
- success: The event was delivered successfully.
- failure: Paddle tried to deliver the simulated event, but it failed. If response object is null, no response received from the server. Check the notification setting endpoint configuration.
- aborted: Paddle couldn't attempt delivery of the simulated event.
payload: Payload sent by Paddle for this event within the simulation.
request.body: Request body sent by Paddle.
response.body: Response body sent by the responding server. May be empty for success responses.
response.statusCode: HTTP status code sent by the responding server.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`simulationId`	Yes	Paddle ID of the simulation entity associated with the run the event was sent as part of.
`simulationRunId`	Yes	Paddle ID of the simulation run entity the event was sent as part of.
`simulationEventId`	Yes	Paddle ID of the simulation event entity to replay.

Implementation Reference

src/functions.ts:686-701 (handler)

The handler function that executes the replay_simulation_run_event tool. It destructures simulationId, simulationRunId, and simulationEventId from params and calls paddle.simulationRunEvents.replay() with them, returning the result or error.

export const replaySimulationRunEvent = async (
  paddle: Paddle,
  params: z.infer<typeof Parameters.replaySimulationRunEventParameters>,
) => {
  try {
    const { simulationId, simulationRunId, simulationEventId } = params;
    const simulationRunEvent = await paddle.simulationRunEvents.replay(
      simulationId,
      simulationRunId,
      simulationEventId,
    );
    return simulationRunEvent;
  } catch (error) {
    return error;
  }
};

src/tools.ts:914-924 (registration)

The tool registration in the tools array, defining the method name, name, description (from prompts), parameters schema (from params), and required actions (write and replay on simulationRunEvents).

  method: "replay_simulation_run_event",
  name: "Replay an event for a simulation run",
  description: prompts.replaySimulationRunEventPrompt,
  parameters: params.replaySimulationRunEventParameters,
  actions: {
    simulationRunEvents: {
      write: true,
      replay: true,
    },
  },
},

src/api.ts:64-64 (registration)
Maps the TOOL_METHODS.REPLAY_SIMULATION_RUN_EVENT constant to the replaySimulationRunEvent handler function in the toolMap used by PaddleAPI to dispatch tool calls.
```
[TOOL_METHODS.REPLAY_SIMULATION_RUN_EVENT]: funcs.replaySimulationRunEvent,
```
src/constants.ts:56-56 (helper)
Constant defining the tool method string 'replay_simulation_run_event' used in TOOL_METHODS for registration and mapping.
```
REPLAY_SIMULATION_RUN_EVENT: "replay_simulation_run_event",
```

Tool Definition Quality

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate this is not read-only and not destructive, but the description adds valuable behavioral context: it explains that Paddle creates a new simulation run event entity for the replay, describes the response structure (including status fields like pending, success, failure, aborted), and provides debugging details (payload, request.body, response.body, response.statusCode). This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it doesn't cover rate limits or authentication needs.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured and appropriately sized. It starts with the core purpose, then provides usage context, behavioral details, and debugging information. While it's slightly longer than minimal, every sentence adds value (e.g., explaining the response structure and debugging fields). It could be slightly more concise but remains efficient.

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's complexity (replaying events with debugging), the description provides comprehensive context. It explains what the tool does, when to use it, what happens during execution (creates new entity), and details the response structure for success/failure analysis. With no output schema, the description effectively compensates by documenting the response format. This is complete for the tool's purpose.

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 schema already documents all three parameters (simulationId, simulationRunId, simulationEventId) with clear descriptions. The description doesn't add any additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, but it doesn't need to since schema coverage is complete. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('resend an event'), the resource ('simulation run event from Paddle'), and the mechanism ('using its ID'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like 'create_simulation_run' or 'replay_notification' by focusing on replaying individual events rather than creating new runs or replaying notifications.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool: 'to retest the sending of an individual event within a simulation run rather than creating a new simulation run and sending all events again.' This provides clear guidance on the alternative (creating a new simulation run) and the specific use case (retesting individual events).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
By punkpeye on April 3, 2026.
mcp
The Hackers Who Tracked My Sleep Cycle
By punkpeye on March 26, 2026.
security
Open Source Has a Bot Problem
By punkpeye on March 19, 2026.
open source

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/PaddleHQ/paddle-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server