Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Payware MCP Server

Payware MCP Server

Official
by payware
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

payware_products_get_schedules

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves all price schedules for a specified product, requiring the Premium plan; other plans return a 403.

Instructions

[Merchant] Get all price schedules for a product. Premium (PRM) plan only: the server answers 403 on any other plan (for an ISV, the merchant's plan).

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": {
      "productId": "<productId>"
    },
    "name": "payware_products_get_schedules"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
partnerIdNoMerchant partner ID (uses PAYWARE_PARTNER_ID env var as default)partner_12345
productIdYesProduct identifier (starts with 'pr')
privateKeyNoRSA private key for authentication (uses environment-specific private key as default)
useSandboxNoUse sandbox environment

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.2.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds valuable non-annotation behavior: the tool is plan-gated and returns 403 for non-Premium plans, including the ISV caveat about the merchant's plan. It does not describe return shape or pagination, so it falls short of a 5.

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 two tightly written sentences with the core action front-loaded and the plan-gating caveat immediately after. There is no redundant or filler wording.

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 simple read-only retrieval tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the main missing operational context: Premium-only access and the 403 failure mode. It does not mention return contents or pagination, but no output schema exists and the core invocation requirements are covered.

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 all four parameters—partnerId, productId, privateKey, and useSandbox—are already documented in the schema, including defaults and the productId pattern. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 all price schedules for a product." The word "all" implicitly contrasts with the singular sibling `payware_products_get_schedule`, but the description does not explicitly name or differentiate that sibling, keeping it at a 4.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives a clear precondition for use: Premium (PRM) plan only, with a 403 on any other plan. That is useful when-not guidance, but it does not compare this tool against alternatives such as the singular schedule getter or create/delete schedule tools.

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