Podyx MCP

podyx_packages_subscription_quote

Read-onlyIdempotent

Generates an advisory subscription quote for package redemption, showing rights and effective session lengths from purchased snapshots and current allowance; it does not reserve slots or lock prices.

Instructions

Subscription quote POST /api/v2/clients/{id}/subscription-redemptions/quotes. Package kind is fixed by the route. Purchased snapshots and current ledger allowance determine rights and effective session lengths. Quotes are advisory. Redemption atomically creates all sessions and required delivery intents, or writes nothing. Paid extras use the existing separate session add-on purchase flow. Current authority is checked on replay. Cancellation uses the existing subscription cancellation routes. Native provider work is deferred; management GET exposes pending, ready or failed delivery. A ready billing portal URL is disclosed only to a key with current subscriptions:manage authority; read-only keys retain state and capability visibility without the live instruction. Plan changes, pause and resume are unsupported. Paid external decline retains an actionable refund obligation without executing a refund. Read/preview only. Follow all pagination; a quote does not reserve a slot or lock a price.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "podyx_packages_subscription_quote"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`body`	Yes
`path`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with them ('Read/preview only'). It adds genuinely useful behavior: a quote does not reserve a slot or lock a price, current authority is checked on replay, and the billing portal URL is only disclosed to keys with subscriptions:manage authority. Much of the remaining text (atomic redemption, refund obligations, deferred provider work) describes sibling endpoints rather than this one, which dilutes rather than deepens the disclosure.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The first two sentences are well front-loaded and useful, but the paragraph then drifts into redemption atomicity, cancellation routes, refund obligations, deferred provider work, and plan-change limitations that an agent does not need in order to call a quote. Substantial content does not earn its place in this tool's description.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and zero schema description coverage, the description would need to explain the six input fields and what a quote returns (price, rights, effective session lengths). It explains none of the inputs and never states the response shape, so an agent cannot construct the body confidently. Its length is spent on adjacent endpoints instead of the gaps that matter here.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across six body fields (date, start_time, setup_id, member_package_id, duration_minutes, recording_seats, selected_one_off_addon_ids), and the description explains none of them. The only hint is 'Package kind is fixed by the route', which weakly implies member_package_id semantics. For a 0%-coverage schema the description should have carried this burden and does not.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening line names a specific operation and route ('Subscription quote POST /api/v2/clients/{id}/subscription-redemptions/quotes') and adds that package kind is fixed by the route, which separates it from generic quote tools. The phrase 'Purchased snapshots and current ledger allowance determine rights and effective session lengths' clarifies what the quote computes. It stops short of explicitly differentiating itself from the near-identical sibling podyx_subscription_quote.

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?

States 'Read/preview only' and that quotes are advisory, plus explicit exclusions: paid extras must go through the separate session add-on purchase flow, cancellation uses the existing subscription cancellation routes, and plan changes/pause/resume are unsupported. That gives real routing guidance. What's missing is a direct statement of when to call this instead of podyx_packages_subscription_redemption or podyx_subscription_quote.

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

Deploy Server