Mercury Multiorg MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_card

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a card's details by ID: status, type, kind, spend limits, budgets, and locks. Use this when you have a card ID and need its information for management or verification.

Instructions

One card's details: last four, name, status, type, kind, spend limits, budgets, locks. No PAN, CVC, or expiry.

    Use this when you have a card id; use `list_cards` to find or filter
    cards. `card_id` is checked for path safety (1-64 letters, digits,
    `-`, `_`) before any request.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entity`	Yes	Exact `entity` key from `list_entities`, not its `display_name`. Required; there is no default.
`card_id`	Yes	Card id from `list_cards`, or a non-null `cardId` on a `list_transactions` row.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.6Sep 15, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / card_id / description

Previous value: -"Card id from `list_cards`."New value: +"Card id from `list_cards`, or a non-null `cardId` on a `list_transactions` row."

changedInput schema / properties / entity / description

Previous value: -"Entity key from `list_entities`. Required; there is no default."New value: +"Exact `entity` key from `list_entities`, not its `display_name`. Required; there is no default."

First observedv0.1.4Sep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations: it states that the card_id is checked for path safety (1-64 letters, digits, `-`, `_`) before any request, which informs the agent about input validation and potential errors. However, it could disclose more about the return format (but output schema exists) or any potential error responses for unauthorized access, but this is minor.

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 concise and front-loaded with the purpose and a clear list of fields. The guidance about when to use it and the alternates follow immediately. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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?

The tool is a simple read operation with 2 required params, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema. The description adds usage context (when to use vs list_cards) and safety checks. The only minor gap is that it could mention what happens if the card_id is not found or invalid, but given the schema and annotations, the description is fairly complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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%, so both parameters are already well-documented in the schema (e.g., `entity` is the exact key from `list_entities`, `card_id` comes from `list_cards` or `list_transactions`). The description does reiterate the origin of `card_id` but doesn't add significant new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specifies the verb 'get' and the resource 'card', and lists the exact fields returned (last four, name, status, etc.). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool `list_cards` by noting it is for a single card when you have a card id, which makes the purpose immediately clear to an agent.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this when you have a card id', and directs the agent to use `list_cards` to find or filter cards. It also provides exclusionary guidance (use `list_cards` instead for discovery), which is strong guidance for tool selection.

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