Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-venmo

mcp-venmo

by markswendsen-code
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

venmo_accept_request

Accept a pending payment request by providing the request ID. Approve and complete the transaction.

Instructions

Accept a pending payment request.

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": {
      "requestId": "<requestId>"
    },
    "name": "venmo_accept_request"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestIdYesID of the payment request to accept

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects (e.g., funds transfer, request removal), authentication requirements, irreversibility, or any other behavioral traits. This is a significant gap for a mutating action.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the action. Every word is useful and there is no fluff or repetition.

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 the simple nature of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally sufficient. However, the lack of any behavioral context (e.g., effects, preconditions) means it is not fully complete for an agent to safely invoke without further information.

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 schema fully documents the single parameter 'requestId', so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but does not need to compensate due to high coverage.

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 'Accept a pending payment request' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'decline_request' or 'request_payment'. It precisely identifies the action and target.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool (when there is a pending payment request), but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives like declining the request. It offers minimal context beyond the verb.

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