SpherePay MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_transfers

List SpherePay transfers with pagination and optional filters by customer, status, or transfer type to track and manage payment workflows.

Instructions

List SpherePay transfers with pagination and optional filters.

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": "list_transfers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No
`limit`	No
`customer`	No
`status`	No
`transfer_type`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.1Mar 21, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It only states it lists with pagination and filters, but omits behavioral traits like read-only nature, default pagination limits, or any side effects. Minimal disclosure.

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?

One sentence, no waste, but slightly terse. Could benefit from a second sentence on parameter details without losing conciseness.

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?

Given an output schema exists, return values need not be explained. However, the description lacks detail on pagination behavior and filter usage. Adequate but not complete for a tool with 5 parameters and no annotations.

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?

The description mentions 'optional filters' but does not elaborate on individual parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain what customer, status, or transfer_type mean, leaving semantics unclear.

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 it lists SpherePay transfers with pagination and optional filters, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling list tools by specifying 'SpherePay transfers' and from get_transfer by implying multiple results.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_transfer or list_virtual_account_transfers. The description implies use for bulk listing with filters, but alternates are not mentioned.

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