ETL-D MCP Server

provision_agent_v1_system_billing_provision_post

Initiate API key purchase for AI agents: starts billing flow, returns poll ID and checkout URL without authentication.

Instructions

Start the programmatic flow for an AI agent to buy its first API key. No authentication required.

Returns a poll_id and a checkout_url.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "provision_agent_v1_system_billing_provision_post"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`plan_type`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.2.0Aug 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose the auth-free nature and the return values (poll_id, checkout_url), which is useful, but it omits the side effect of creating a checkout session or how the polling flow progresses. The agent cannot anticipate state changes beyond the return.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the purpose and key facts (auth, returns) front-loaded. Every word earns its place; the structure is exemplary for such a short description.

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

Completeness2/5

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

While the description gives a purpose and return values, it is incomplete for a tool that initiates a billing flow. It fails to explain the plan_type parameter, what the poll_id is for, or how the checkout_url should be used. An agent cannot confidently execute the full flow based solely on this text.

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%, so the description must explain the one parameter (plan_type), but it does not. The enum values (top_up_10k, sub_monthly_29) are visible in the schema but their practical implications (prepaid vs subscription) are unexplained, leaving the agent unable to choose wisely.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific trigger ('programmatic flow for an AI agent to buy its first API key') and a clear verb ('Start'), which conveys the tool's role. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling create_checkout_v1_system_billing_checkout_post, but the mention of 'first API key' and 'agent' gives a distinct identity.

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?

Provides a clear condition for use (when an AI agent needs to buy its first API key) and notes that no authentication is required. However, it offers no guidance on when to prefer this over the related checkout sibling or what to do after receiving the checkout_url, leaving alternatives implicit.

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

Deploy Server