Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Payware MCP Server

Payware MCP Server

Official
by payware
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

payware_data_get_report_requests

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves historical execution requests for a specific report type, including status and parameters, so you can track report run history in production.

Instructions

[Merchant] Get all execution requests for a specific report type. Returns historical execution records with status and parameters. Production only - not supported in sandbox.

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": {
      "reportId": "<reportId>"
    },
    "name": "payware_data_get_report_requests"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reportIdYesThe report id whose runs to list, bare (processedTransactions) or as the path the list returns (/processedTransactions)
partnerIdNoPartner ID from payware dashboard. Uses PAYWARE_PARTNER_ID env var as default.partner_12345
privateKeyNoRSA private key for authentication. Uses production private key as default (Data API is production-only).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.2.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the tool is production-only, unsupported in sandbox, and returns historical execution records with status and parameters. It does not discuss permissions or authentication behavior beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Three short sentences with no wasted wording. The core purpose is front-loaded, the return content is summarized, and the production-only restriction is clearly separated at the end.

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?

For a read-only lookup with complete schema descriptions and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description supplies the key environmental constraint and expected return content. It does not explain pagination or ordering of historical records, but no output schema exists to cover that and the omission is relatively minor.

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 the schema already documents the reportId enum and identifies partnerId and privateKey usage. The description adds only a high-level reference to a specific report type and does not elaborate on parameter formats or defaults beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries parameter semantics.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: get execution requests for a specific report type. It also clarifies the return content as historical execution records with status and parameters, which helps distinguish this from a single-status lookup. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools such as payware_data_get_report_status or payware_data_list_reports.

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 production-only constraint gives useful context about when this tool can be used. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over nearby alternatives like get_report_status or list_reports, so the agent must infer the distinction from the purpose wording.

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