Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
RevClamp MCP Server

RevClamp MCP Server

Official
by revclamp
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

revclamp_lint_dispute_evidence

Lints Stripe dispute evidence access_activity_log payloads for UTF-16 size limits, non-destructive RevClamp CE 3.0 markers, note preservation, and Visa two-identifier overlap.

Instructions

Lints Stripe dispute evidence[access_activity_log] payloads against the 18,000 UTF-16 code unit ceiling, non-destructive RevClamp CE 3.0 block markers, merchant note preservation, and Visa CE 3.0 two-identifier overlap.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
demoNoSet true to lint a sample preset fixture when accessActivityLog is omitted.
presetNovalid_ce3_non_destructive
accessActivityLogNo
priorTransactionsNo
disputedTransactionNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.20.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / demo
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Set true to lint a sample preset fixture when accessActivityLog is omitted.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed11 schema fields changedv1.20.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / accessActivityLog
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / disputedTransaction
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / evidenceLogText
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Merged or candidate Stripe dispute evidence[access_activity_log] payload evaluated against the 18,000 UTF-16 code unit ceiling and non-destructive delimiter markers.",
-  "maxLength": 30000,
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / existingMerchantNotes
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Existing human AE/support notes inside evidence[access_activity_log] that must be preserved.",
-  "maxLength": 18000,
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / hasDeviceMatch
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Whether the disputed charge device_id fingerprint matches the historical undisputed charges.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / hasIpMatch
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Whether the disputed charge IPv4/IPv6 address matches the historical undisputed charges.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / preset / default
      Added value: +"valid_ce3_non_destructive"
    • removedInput schema / properties / preset / description
      Removed value: -"Scenario preset to evaluate when custom evidenceLogText is omitted (default: 'valid_ce3_non_destructive')."
    • changedInput schema / properties / preset / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "valid_ce3_non_destructive",
-  "utf16_overflow_19k",
-  "missing_device_and_overwrite_risk",
-  "custom"
-]New value: +[
+  "valid_ce3_non_destructive",
+  "utf16_overflow_19k",
+  "missing_device_and_overwrite_risk"
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / priorMatchedCount
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Number of prior undisputed Stripe charges (120d-365d old) with matching customer_id and IP/device fingerprint (Visa CE 3.0 requires >= 2).",
-  "maximum": 50,
-  "minimum": 0,
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / priorTransactions
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "array"
+}
  3. First observedv1.20.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden; it does add useful traits ('non-destructive' block markers, merchant note preservation) suggesting a read-only, safe operation. But it never states the return shape (violations list? booleans?), whether it fails hard or reports findings, or how the preset/demo path differs.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the verb and resource and then enumerates the checks. No filler, though the bracketed notation and stacked clauses make it slightly hard to parse.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 5-parameter tool with nested objects, zero annotations, and no output schema, the description should explain what lint results look like and what the demo/preset switches do. It covers the rule set well but leaves the input modes and output contract underspecified.

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 20%, so three of five parameters (accessActivityLog, priorTransactions, disputedTransaction) are undocumented in both places. The description implicitly ties accessActivityLog to the UTF-16 ceiling and the two-identifier overlap to the transaction objects, adding some meaning, but not enough to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

A specific verb ('Lints') plus a specific resource ('Stripe dispute evidence payloads') and the exact rules enforced (18,000 UTF-16 ceiling, CE 3.0 block markers, two-identifier overlap). This is clearly a validation tool, distinguishable from the sibling stage_stripe_dispute_ce3, though it never names that sibling or states the relationship.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description never says when to run this versus revclamp_stage_stripe_dispute_ce3, or whether it is a pre-flight gate before staging. The 'demo' and 'preset' parameters imply a sample/fixture path, but no guidance is given on when to use them.

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