Skip to main content
Glama
outis-co

franchisedata-mcp

by outis-co
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Check API Credit Balance

check_balance
Read-onlyIdempotent

Query the remaining prepaid credit balance and active status for a FranchiseData Pro API key before running batch paid queries to confirm sufficient funds.

Instructions

FREE. Query the remaining prepaid credit balance (in USD and micro-USD) and active status for a FranchiseData Pro API key. Read-only operation requiring an API key passed via 'api_key' argument or 'Authorization: Bearer fc_live_...' header. Returns 400 if key is omitted, or 401 if key is invalid. WHEN TO USE: Use before executing batch paid queries to verify sufficient funds remain. WHEN NOT TO USE: Do not use for minting new keys or topping up funds; use 'topup_credits' instead. ALTERNATIVES: Use 'topup_credits' to deposit credits or create new credentials.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
api_keyNoOptional if Authorization HTTP header is set. The 'fc_live_...' API key to inspect.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
is_activeYesWhether the API key is active
key_prefixNoPublic key prefix (e.g. 'fc_live_7321...')
balance_usdYesFormatted USD balance (e.g. '$4.50')
balance_microYesBalance in micro-USD (1 USD = 1,000,000 micro)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / api_key / description
      Previous value: -"Optional if Authorization header is set. Your fc_live_... API key."New value: +"Optional if Authorization HTTP header is set. The 'fc_live_...' API key to inspect."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "balance_micro": {
+      "description": "Balance in micro-USD (1 USD = 1,000,000 micro)",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "balance_usd": {
+      "description": "Formatted USD balance (e.g. '$4.50')",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "is_active": {
+      "description": "Whether the API key is active",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "key_prefix": {
+      "description": "Public key prefix (e.g. 'fc_live_7321...')",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "balance_usd",
+    "balance_micro",
+    "is_active"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds value beyond them: it is free, it documents the auth mechanism (api_key arg or Authorization: Bearer fc_live_... header), and it discloses specific failure modes (400 on missing key, 401 on invalid key). That is meaningful behavior an agent cannot get from the annotation block.

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?

Front-loads the most decision-relevant fact ('FREE') and organizes the rest into labeled sections, so it scans quickly. Slightly verbose with all-caps section headers and some repetition between the auth sentence and the parameter description, but nothing is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no prose. Combined with clear usage conditions, auth requirements, and error codes, the description gives an agent everything needed to invoke this single-parameter read tool 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 coverage is 100% and the schema already states the key is optional if the Authorization header is set, so the description largely restates parameter behavior. It mildly reinforces the header fallback but adds no format or validation detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 for full 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Query the remaining prepaid credit balance... for a FranchiseData Pro API key') and names what it is not for. The sibling topup_credits is explicitly contrasted, so an agent can route without opening either schema.

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE ('before executing batch paid queries to verify sufficient funds'), WHEN NOT TO USE ('do not use for minting new keys or topping up funds'), and a named alternative ('use topup_credits'). All three guidance elements are present with the selecting condition.

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