Payme MCP Server

Send Receipt

receipts_send

Send receipt notification to customer via SMS. Input receipt ID and phone number to trigger the notification.

Instructions

Send receipt notification to customer via SMS. Example: receipts_send({ receiptId: '63...', phone: '998901234567' })

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": {
      "receiptId": "<receiptId>",
      "phone": "<phone>"
    },
    "name": "receipts_send"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`phone`	Yes	Phone number (e.g. '998901234567')
`receiptId`	Yes	Receipt ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 25, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It describes the basic action but omits potential side effects, prerequisites (e.g., customer consent), or limitations (e.g., rate limits).

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 a single sentence with an example, front-loading the core action. No superfluous words, making it highly concise and clear.

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?

Given no output schema and simple parameters, the description covers the basic purpose and provides an example. However, it lacks details on return values or error conditions, and does not address usage context relative to siblings.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds an example but does not provide significant additional meaning beyond what the schema already offers.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool sends a receipt notification via SMS, specifying the verb, resource, and medium. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like cards_create or receipts_pay.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or when not to use this tool. Alternatives are not mentioned, and context for preferring this over related tools like receipts_pay is absent.

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

Deploy Server