Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Payware MCP Server

Payware MCP Server

Official
by payware
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

payware_poi_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves all physical payment points configured for a merchant and reports each POI's status (IDLE, READY, BUSY) so you can verify active payment locations.

Instructions

[Merchant] List all POIs (Points of Interaction) for a merchant.

Authentication: your own JWT (an ISV makes the same call on your behalf). Endpoint: GET /poi Use Case: Retrieve all physical payment points configured for a merchant.

POI states: IDLE (no price, no sale running), READY (price set, waiting for a scan), BUSY (scanned, sale running). A disabled POI is not a state: it shows isActive false.

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": "payware_poi_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
useSandboxNoUse sandbox environment for testing

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.2.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint, and openWorldHint already in annotations, the safety profile is covered. The description adds context annotations can't carry: the JWT auth requirement (or an ISV calling on your behalf), the endpoint, and how POI states are encoded in the result (IDLE/READY/BUSY, disabled shown as isActive=false). It leaves out pagination or result-size behavior.

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?

Markdown-style bold labels (Authentication, Endpoint, Use Case) make it scannable, and the one-line summary comes first. The purpose is partly restated twice ('List all POIs' and 'Retrieve all physical payment points'), a small redundancy, but overall it is tight.

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?

There is no output schema, so the state legend (IDLE/READY/BUSY plus isActive) usefully tells the agent what to expect in the response. Auth and endpoint details round out setup needs. The main omission is any mention of pagination or envelope shape for a potentially long list.

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% for the single `useSandbox` parameter, so the schema already handles it and the description adds nothing. It never mentions sandbox vs production toggling, so the parameter gets no extra meaning from the text. Baseline 3 applies.

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 leads with a specific verb and resource: 'List all POIs (Points of Interaction) for a merchant,' and the endpoint GET /poi confirms the resource. The word 'all' implicitly separates it from single-record siblings like payware_poi_get, but no sibling is explicitly named.

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?

A 'Use Case' line says to use this to 'Retrieve all physical payment points configured for a merchant,' giving an implied usage context. It stops short of an explicit when-to-use-this-vs-that rule: it never says to use payware_poi_get for a single POI or payware_poi_get_status when only state is needed.

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