XPayr MCP Server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

xpayr_create_payment_session

Creates non-custodial crypto payment sessions for merchants and AI agents, generating multi-chain checkout links, QR/direct transfers, reusable links, and invoice email delivery.

Instructions

Create a non-custodial crypto payment session supporting Dual Checkout (Web3 1-Click Pay & Direct Transfer / QR from Binance/Bybit/OKX with on-chain explorer verification), multi-chain agnostic links, 1-year reusable payment links, and automated HTML invoice email delivery.

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": {
      "amount": "<amount>",
      "currency": "<currency>"
    },
    "name": "xpayr_create_payment_session"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`amount`	Yes	Invoice amount in fiat/token units (e.g., 49.90).
`network`	No	Blockchain network key (e.g., tron-mainnet, bsc-mainnet, solana-mainnet, polygon-mainnet, base-mainnet, arc-mainnet, bsc-testnet). Optional if is_multi_chain is true.	tron-mainnet
`currency`	Yes	Payment token symbol (e.g., USDT, USDC, SOL, TRX, BNB, ETH, MATIC).	USDT
`order_id`	No	Merchant internal order or invoice reference ID (e.g., ORD-1001).
`cancel_url`	No	HTTPS redirect URL if customer cancels checkout.
`coupon_code`	No	Optional promotional discount coupon code to apply.
`description`	No	Human-readable order description shown on checkout and invoice.
`is_reusable`	No	When true, the payment link remains active for 1 year and accepts repeated payments.
`success_url`	No	HTTPS redirect URL after confirmed payment.
`customer_email`	No	Buyer email address for invoice delivery and payment receipt notifications.
`is_multi_chain`	No	When true, generates a universal multi-chain link allowing the buyer to dynamically choose their network and token at checkout.
`ipn_callback_url`	No	HTTPS webhook endpoint URL for HMAC-SHA256 signed payment lifecycle events.
`send_invoice_email`	No	When true and customer_email is provided, sends a branded responsive HTML invoice email with 1-click payment CTA.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose some real behavior: the session is non-custodial, reuses for 1 year, supports on-chain explorer verification, and can trigger automated HTML invoice email delivery (a side effect). It omits other material traits an agent needs before a mutating create call — auth requirements, idempotency/duplicate-order behavior, and whether emails/webhooks fire immediately.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is a single front-loaded sentence, which is good, but it front-loads marketing copy ("Dual Checkout", "multi-chain agnostic links", "1-Click Pay") and a nesting-heavy parenthetical instead of operational facts. The length itself is fine; the wording does not fully earn its place.

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?

This is a 13-parameter creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, so the description must cover both safety profile and result shape. It never says what is returned (payment session ID, hosted checkout/QR link, expiry) or how the agent should hand that back to a buyer, which is the single most important thing to know after calling a checkout-creation tool.

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 of the 13 parameters documented in the schema itself (network defaults, is_multi_chain interaction, coupon_code, ipn_callback_url). The description's feature list loosely maps to parameters like is_reusable and is_multi_chain but adds no format, constraint, or interaction detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource ("Create a non-custodial crypto payment session") and enumerates what the session supports (Dual Checkout, reusable links, invoice email). The create-vs-get distinction from xpayr_get_payment_session is reasonably inferable from the verb, but no sibling is named, so it stops short of 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance: nothing tells the agent whether to call this versus xpayr_create_ai_agent, xpayr_bridge_agent_intent_to_checkout, or the list/get session tools. Feature phrases like "Dual Checkout" imply scenarios but are not framed as selection criteria, and no prerequisites (API key, merchant onboarding, supported network) are stated.

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