Skip to main content
Glama
SubscriptionTech

ProAbono MCP Installation

Official
by SubscriptionTech
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Install the ProAbono Customer Portal in a page

install_customer_portal

Generates embed code for the ProAbono Customer Portal in your site page: security hash, route, and template snippet. Requires an authenticated customer area to render for the signed-in customer.

Instructions

Generates the code that embeds the ProAbono Customer Portal inside a page of the merchant's own site -- current plan, invoices, payment method, billing address, usage -- for the signed-in customer. This is step 1 of the In-Site installation. Returns the server-side security hash computation, the route that renders the page, and the snippet to place in the template. Requires an authenticated customer area: the hosted pages always render for an identified customer.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stackYesThe host project's stack. Detect it from the open project (package.json, composer.json, requirements.txt, Gemfile, .csproj) and confirm with the developer. Use "generic" when none fits.
target_pageYesPath of the page that will host the portal, e.g. "/account/billing".
project_rootNoRoot of the developer's project, where `.proabono/installation.json` is written. Defaults to the directory this server was launched in, which is the project for every MCP client that starts the server inside it. Pass it when that is not the case.
record_stateNoRecord this step in `.proabono/installation.json`. Default true. Set false to generate code without touching the developer's filesystem at all.
pass_languageNoPass the application's UI language to ProAbono. Only when the application is the authority for it: it overwrites what the customer set in the portal.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.3.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / project_root
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Root of the developer's project, where `.proabono/installation.json` is written. Defaults to the directory this server was launched in, which is the project for every MCP client that starts the server inside it. Pass it when that is not the case.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / record_state
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Record this step in `.proabono/installation.json`. Default true. Set false to generate code without touching the developer's filesystem at all.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It discloses that the tool returns three artifacts (security hash, route, snippet) and that it requires an authenticated customer area. However, it doesn't mention side effects like filesystem writes (e.g., .proabono/installation.json) or whether it modifies the project, which is a gap for a code-generation tool. It does imply a multi-environment need but stops short of fully disclosing operational impact.

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 description is a tight 3-sentence block with the main purpose front-loaded and return artifacts listed early. The prerequisite is a single clause. There is no filler; every sentence earns its place, making it efficient and easy to scan.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 params, code generation, 3 return artifacts) and no output schema, the description covers the key usage context: the installation step, the requirements, and what the output includes. It lacks explicit mention of side effects like filesystem writes or the need to run in the developer's project, but the context signals suggest an MCP environment, which partially mitigates this. Overall, it is nearly complete for an agent to correctly invoke.

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 parameters. The description adds some context about the overall purpose but does not add additional meaning beyond the schema. For example, it doesn't explain the trade-offs of 'record_state' or 'pass_language' beyond their names. Baseline is 3, which is appropriate.

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 verb 'Install' and the resource 'ProAbono Customer Portal', and specifies what the tool generates (code embedding the portal) and its scope (in a page of the merchant's site). It also differentiates from siblings by focusing on the in-site installation step, not on other portal-related operations like creating subscriptions or managing offers.

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?

Explicitly names this as 'step 1 of the In-Site installation', provides a prerequisite ('Requires an authenticated customer area'), and contrasts with hosted pages. It tells when to use it and implicitly guides against using it for other portal setups. The description is clear about the deployment context, leaving no ambiguity about when to select this tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools