Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
klarna-mcp

klarna-mcp

by Walma-Labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Payout summary

get_payout_summary
Read-onlyIdempotent

Summarize payouts by currency for a date range, showing sales, fees, returns, commissions, holdback, releases, reversals, tax, and settlement amounts in minor units. Use it for monthly reconciliation.

Instructions

Summary of all payouts in a date range, one entry per currency: total sales, fees, returns, commissions, holdback, releases, reversals, tax and settlement amount (minor units). Good for monthly reconciliation.

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": {
      "start_date": "<start_date>",
      "end_date": "<end_date>"
    },
    "name": "get_payout_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
end_dateYesEnd (use 23:59:59 to include the whole day): ISO 8601 date-time filter on payout date, e.g. 2026-09-01T00:00:00Z. A bare date means 00:00:00 of that day.
start_dateYesStart: ISO 8601 date-time filter on payout date, e.g. 2026-09-01T00:00:00Z. A bare date means 00:00:00 of that day.
currency_codeNoISO 4217, e.g. SEK, EUR, USD

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds real behavioral detail beyond them: one entry per currency, the exact aggregate fields returned, and that amounts are in minor units. It omits granularity/auth/pagination details but adds meaningful context.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose in one dense sentence, then a short usage hint. The field enumeration is long but each term earns its place for a financial summary; no filler sentences.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so well by listing every aggregate field and the unit (minor units) plus the per-currency granularity. It could still note whether currency_code narrows the result, but it is otherwise sufficient.

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 coverage is 100%, so start_date/end_date format and the currency_code pattern are already fully documented in the schema. The description only echoes the date-range scoping and never mentions currency_code filtering, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (summary of payouts) and enumerates exactly what each entry contains, which cleanly separates it from the per-payout siblings list_payouts/get_payout. It does not name a sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

"Good for monthly reconciliation" implies a usage context but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and never names the competing aggregate tools (get_payout_report_csv, get_payouts_summary_report_csv) to route between them.

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