klarna-mcp

List captures

list_captures

Read-onlyIdempotent

List all captures on a Klarna order to review captured and refunded amounts, capture time, references, and shipping info.

Instructions

List all captures on a Klarna order, with captured_amount and refunded_amount (minor units), capture time, references and shipping info.

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": {
      "order_id": "<order_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_captures"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`order_id`	Yes	Klarna order id (UUID), as returned at purchase. Not the merchant order number.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 19, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds useful field-level context (captured_amount/refunded_amount in minor units, capture time, references, shipping info) but says nothing about pagination, result counts, or external-system behavior implied by openWorldHint.

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?

One tightly packed sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and zero filler. Every clause (verb, target, returned fields) earns its place.

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?

For a read-only list tool, annotations cover safety and the schema fully covers the sole parameter; with no output schema, the description usefully enumerates return fields. The only shortfall is absent pagination/ordering guidance for a list endpoint.

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%, and the single order_id parameter is fully documented in the schema (UUID, not the merchant order number). The description contributes no additional parameter syntax or format detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 description uses a specific verb and resource ('List all captures on a Klarna order') and even enumerates the returned fields, so an agent knows exactly what it does. However, it never distinguishes itself from the close sibling 'get_capture' (singular), leaving the agent to infer the difference.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, and no alternative tool is named. The phrase 'on a Klarna order' implies the context, but the agent receives no explicit routing advice versus get_capture or the other list_* siblings.

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

Deploy Server