Payhip MCP Server

payhip_guide

Provides first-call guidance on Payhip orders, products, sales reports, screens, and sign-in links so you can find where to act in the seller account.

Instructions

How to work in Payhip (orders, products and sales reports): its screens and the sign-in link. Call this first.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "payhip_guide"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task`	No	What you want done in Payhip, in your words.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description must carry the behavioral burden; it implies a read-only informational resource but never states that it performs no actions or what form the guidance comes back in. The absence of any warning about it not executing Payhip operations is a meaningful gap for a tool whose siblings are action verbs.

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?

Two compact sentences with the coverage list front-loaded and the call-order instruction last, which is a sensible ordering. The parenthetical list is slightly compressed but no sentence is filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple one-optional-parameter guidance tool with no output schema, the coverage is adequate but not complete: it never says whether the guide is static documentation or tailored to the supplied task, nor what the agent should expect to receive. One clarifying clause would close the gap.

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?

The single optional "task" parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not explain how the task string shapes the returned guidance or whether free-form phrasing is expected, adding nothing beyond the schema.

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 states this is a guide to working in Payhip, enumerating the covered domains (orders, products, sales reports, screens, sign-in link). That is specific enough for an agent to recognize it as an orientation/knowledge tool rather than an action tool, though there is no explicit contrast with a named sibling.

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?

"Call this first" gives a clear ordering instruction, which is exactly the sequencing an agent needs for an orientation tool ahead of action tools like payhip_open or payhip_click. It does not state when it is unnecessary or what to do after, but the primary guidance is explicit.

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

Deploy Server