Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
stripe-mcp-server

stripe-mcp-server

by udaykapur
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Capture Payment Intent

capture_payment_intent
Destructive

Capture a previously authorized PaymentIntent that was set to manual capture. Optionally capture a partial amount instead of the full authorization.

Instructions

Capture a previously authorized PaymentIntent (capture_method=manual). Optionally capture a partial amount.

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": {
      "payment_intent_id": "<payment_intent_id>"
    },
    "name": "capture_payment_intent"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
payment_intent_idYesPaymentIntent ID (pi_...)
amount_to_captureNoAmount to capture in smallest currency unit. Omit to capture full authorization.
idempotency_keyNoOptional idempotency key for safe retries

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations include destructiveHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate destructiveness. It adds that partial capture is optional. No contradictions. Could discuss side effects or authorization, but overall transparent.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, no fluff. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema, but the tool is simple. Could mention return value (captured PaymentIntent), but the description is adequate for its complexity. Annotations and schema cover most needs.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining 'Optionally capture a partial amount' for amount_to_capture and 'safe retries' for idempotency_key, which clarifies usage beyond schema.

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 verb 'capture', the resource 'PaymentIntent', and the specific condition 'previously authorized (capture_method=manual)'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like confirm_payment_intent or create_payment_intent.

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 specifies when to use: for previously authorized PaymentIntents with manual capture. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an AI agent to select correctly.

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