Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
BlindPay MCP Server

BlindPay MCP Server

by blindpaylabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Instances Onboarding Ownership Documents

GetV1InstancesOnboardingOwnershipDocuments
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve onboarding ownership documents for a specific BlindPay instance using its instance ID to review required business ownership details.

Instructions

Retrieve Business Documents

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": {
      "instance_id": "<instance_id>"
    },
    "name": "GetV1InstancesOnboardingOwnershipDocuments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
instance_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.9.3

TDQS

D1.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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 covered. The description adds zero behavioral context—no note about what documents are returned, whether they are per-instance, or anything about the open-world fetch.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The three-word phrase is efficient and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise. There is no wasted text, yet the brevity comes at the cost of meaning.

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 no parameter documentation, the description must explain what is retrieved and how instance_id scopes it. It provides neither, leaving an agent without enough to confidently invoke the tool or interpret results.

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?

There is one parameter, instance_id, with 0% schema description coverage, so the description carries the burden of explaining it. It says nothing about instance_id, its format (a 15-character in_ ID), or what it scopes—failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description says "Retrieve Business Documents," which gives a verb and a resource but does not name ownership documents as the tool title does, creating a mismatch. It is essentially a light restatement of the name and offers nothing to distinguish it from the dozens of sibling GET tools.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to, or which sibling to prefer. With many onboarding-related siblings like OnboardingBusinessDetails and OnboardingBusinessProfile, an agent has no basis for routing to 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