Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
paybond-mcp-Python

paybond-mcp-Python

by nonameuserd
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Get A2A Task Contract

paybond_get_a2a_task_contract
Read-only

Fetch a published Paybond A2A task contract by its identifier to access contract details for verification or processing.

Instructions

Fetch one published Paybond A2A task contract by identifier.

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": {
      "contract_id": "<contract_id>"
    },
    "name": "paybond_get_a2a_task_contract"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contract_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description indicates a read-only fetch operation, which aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation. However, it does not add behavioral details beyond what annotations already provide, such as error handling or authorization needs.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the purpose efficiently with no redundant words or sections.

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?

Given that an output schema exists (though not shown in detail) and the tool is a simple fetch, the description is reasonably complete. It lacks mention of error states or what 'published' implies, but overall sufficient for an experienced agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the 'contract_id' parameter's format or constraints, but it only mentions 'by identifier' without further details. The schema itself lacks descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb 'Fetch' and clearly identifies the resource as a 'published Paybond A2A task contract', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'paybond_list_a2a_task_contracts' which lists multiple.

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 usage for fetching a single contract by ID, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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