xendit-mcp

create_disbursement

Send a payout to a bank account by specifying the recipient's bank code, account number, account holder name, and amount.

Instructions

Create a disbursement (payout) to a bank account.

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": {
      "external_id": "<external_id>",
      "amount": "<amount>",
      "bank_code": "<bank_code>",
      "account_holder_name": "<account_holder_name>",
      "account_number": "<account_number>"
    },
    "name": "create_disbursement"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`amount`	Yes	Amount to disburse
`bank_code`	Yes	Destination bank code (BCA, MANDIRI, BNI, etc.)
`description`	No	Disbursement description
`external_id`	Yes	Unique disbursement ID
`account_number`	Yes	Bank account number
`account_holder_name`	Yes	Account holder name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states the creation action but omits side effects, authorization requirements, idempotency, error conditions, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 no redundancy. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given 6 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not mention return values, error handling, prerequisites, or what happens on success/failure.

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%, with each parameter having a clear description (e.g., amount, bank_code). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action 'Create' and the resource 'disbursement (payout)', with the target 'to a bank account'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_invoice, create_va, etc., which deal with different resources.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to create a disbursement vs. using other payment methods. No exclusions or context are given.

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

Deploy Server