SpherePay MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_virtual_account_transfers

List transfers for a specific virtual account to view deposit activity and conversion history. Use this tool to track financial workflows on SpherePay platform.

Instructions

List transfers for a specific virtual account. Shows deposit activity and conversion history.

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": {
      "virtual_account_id": "<virtual_account_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_virtual_account_transfers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`virtual_account_id`	Yes
`page`	No
`limit`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.1Mar 21, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It implies read-only access but does not state side effects, authorization needs, rate limits, or data freshness. Minimal behavioral information beyond the purpose.

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?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences totaling 15 words, with no filler or redundancy. Every word serves the purpose.

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?

While an output schema exists (so return format is covered), the description does not address pagination parameters or how the listing behaves with large datasets. It is minimally adequate but leaves gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description adds no meaning to any of the three parameters. Parameters like 'virtual_account_id', 'page', and 'limit' are left entirely undeveloped.

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 the action ('List transfers'), the specific resource ('for a specific virtual account'), and specifies the content ('deposit activity and conversion history'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_transfers or list_virtual_accounts.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or limitations. The agent is left to infer from the tool name and sibling context.

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