lightbulb-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

airwallex_create_payment

DestructiveIdempotent

Create an Airwallex payment to a saved beneficiary with a unique request ID. Provide amount, currencies, reason, and reference to submit an approval-required payment.

Instructions

Create one Airwallex payment to a saved beneficiary with an exact idempotent request id. Approval required; every field is bounded and nothing else is forwarded.

Args: request_id (required): Idempotent request id (8-64 URL-safe characters). beneficiary_id (required): Saved Airwallex beneficiary id. payment_amount (required): Positive amount with at most two decimals. payment_currency (required): ISO-4217 currency the beneficiary receives. source_currency (required): ISO-4217 currency debited. reason (required): Payment reason code (lower snake case). reference (required): Statement reference (up to 140 printable characters). payment_date: Optional value date (YYYY-MM-DD). project_id: Authenticated Project UUID. project_ref: Exact project correlation reference. connector_account_ref: Project-bound connector account alias. idempotency_key: Stable business-action identity. effect: Claimed read or write effect; Spring verifies it. approval_ref: Approved platform task UUID when resuming a write.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`effect`	No
`reason`	No
`reference`	No
`project_id`	No
`request_id`	No
`project_ref`	No
`approval_ref`	No
`payment_date`	No
`beneficiary_id`	No
`payment_amount`	No
`idempotency_key`	No
`source_currency`	No
`payment_currency`	No
`connector_account_ref`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed15 schema fields changedv0.1.1Sep 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / approval_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Approval Ref"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / arguments

Removed value: -{
-  "default": "{}",
-  "title": "Arguments",
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / beneficiary_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Beneficiary Id"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / connector_account_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Connector Account Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / effect

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Effect"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Idempotency Key"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / payment_amount

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Payment Amount"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / payment_currency

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Payment Currency"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / payment_date

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Payment Date"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / project_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Project Id"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / project_ref

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Project Ref"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / reason

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Reason"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / reference

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Reference"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / request_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Request Id"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / source_currency

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Source Currency"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotent=true, destructive=true, and readOnly=false. The description adds valuable context beyond that: 'Approval required' and 'every field is bounded and nothing else is forwarded', which alerts the agent to security and approval behavior. No contradiction with 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 one-sentence overview is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a compact, structured Args list. Every line adds specific parameter semantics, with no filler or repetition.

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?

The description covers purpose, prerequisites, approval requirement, and all parameter meanings, and an output schema exists so return values need no explanation. It lacks explicit guidance on the approval workflow or how approval_ref is used beyond 'when resuming a write', a minor gap for such a complex payment tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by documenting all 14 parameters with constraints: request_id character rules, amount positive with at most two decimals, ISO-4217 currencies, reason code casing, reference length, and date format. This is far beyond what the empty schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Create one Airwallex payment to a saved beneficiary'. It also names the key requirement 'with an exact idempotent request id', which clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like airwallex_create_beneficiary and airwallex_create_global_account.

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 gives clear context by specifying the prerequisite of a 'saved beneficiary' and noting that 'Approval required' before the payment is created. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when-not-to-use, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Deploy Server