Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Stables MCP Server

Stables MCP Server

Official
by stables-money
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Add document

add_document
Destructive

Attach a supporting document, such as an invoice or contract, to a transfer or payment route deposit when compliance requests it.

Instructions

Attach a supporting document (invoice, contract or other) to a transfer or a payment route deposit, for example when Stables compliance asks for one. The file goes as a base64 data URL ('data:application/pdf;base64,...').

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": {
      "on": "<on>",
      "transactionId": "<transactionId>",
      "fileName": "<fileName>",
      "base64Url": "<base64Url>"
    },
    "name": "add_document"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
onYesWhat the document belongs to: a transfer, or a deposit on a payment route
typeNoWhat the document is (default other)
fileNameYesFile name shown to Stables, e.g. 'invoice-2041.pdf'
base64UrlYesThe file as a data URL: 'data:<mime>;base64,<data>'
transactionIdYesThe transfer ID, or the deposit ID from get_virtual_account_history

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.6.11
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Addedv2.4.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is carried structurally. The description adds useful context (file must arrive as a base64 data URL, tied to a specific transaction/deposit), but says nothing about size/mime limits, permission requirements, or whether the attachment can be undone — notable gaps for a flagged-destructive write.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the action and targets front-loaded and the format constraint following as supporting detail. Every clause carries information.

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?

A mutation tool with full schema coverage and annotations that already encode safety/idempotency, and no output schema to explain. The description supplies purpose, trigger, and encoding format; only error/limit behavior is missing, which is a minor residual gap.

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 baseline is 3. The description's base64 data URL example ('data:application/pdf;base64,...') largely restates the schema's own base64Url description, and the invoice/contract/other mention duplicates the type enum, adding little beyond structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb (attach) and resource (supporting document), plus the exact target entities (transfer or payment route deposit). It is clearly the create-counterpart to the sibling list_documents/get_document_download_url/delete_document cluster, so an agent can distinguish it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a concrete usage context — 'when Stables compliance asks for one' — which tells the agent the trigger scenario. It does not name exclusions or point at alternatives (e.g., list_documents for review, delete_document for removal), so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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