Skip to main content
Glama

sella

by io.github.sella-network

service_deliver

Hand over what a buyer paid for. Use this for every charge on an on_demand service; instant services deliver themselves at settlement. Pass content, a url, or both. Delivery is final and cannot be replaced afterwards, so send the finished thing. Call charge_list to find charges still waiting on you.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoA link to the goods.
noteNoOptional message to the buyer, max 600 characters.
contentNoThe goods, up to 20000 characters.
charge_idYesThe charge you are delivering against.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds critical behavioral context: 'Delivery is final and cannot be replaced afterwards, so send the finished thing.' This discloses irreversibility and sets user expectations beyond what the schema or annotations convey.

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 four concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance, a parameter hint, and a sibling reference. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity (4 params, no output schema), the description covers the action, applicability, exclusions, finality, and how to find pending work. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without additional documentation.

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%, but the description adds a meaningful relationship not present in the field descriptions: 'Pass content, a url, or both.' This clarifies that content and url are alternatives or combinable, which is valuable semantic information beyond the individual parameter descriptions.

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+resource: 'Hand over what a buyer paid for.' It specifies the exact scope (every charge on an on_demand service) and explicitly excludes instant services, distinguishing it from sibling tools like deliver_product and charge_list.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives explicit when-to-use ('Use this for every charge on an on_demand service') and when-not-to-use ('instant services deliver themselves at settlement'). It also points to a sibling tool, charge_list, for finding outstanding charges, providing a clear alternative.

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

All sella toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but the deprecated tools (list_datasets, list_market_apis, search_datasets, try_dataset) overlap with modern replacements (search_catalog, get_listing). Some functional overlap exists between get_activity and charge_list, but descriptions clarify their scopes. Overall, an agent can usually tell tools apart, with a few legacy remnants.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (browse_catalog, business_start, charge_create, etc.). Even the deprecated tools adhere to the same style. There are no mixed conventions or vague verbs like 'process' or 'run'. The naming is highly predictable.

Tool Count3/5

At 52 tools, this is a large surface. The domain is broad (marketplace buying/selling, business management, policy, storefront, distribution, authentication), so many tools are justifiable. However, four deprecated tools could be pruned, and the count is on the heavy side compared to typical MCP servers. It feels overengineered, yet each tool addresses a distinct facet of the platform.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the full lifecycle: discovery, evaluation, purchase, delivery, feedback, business management, policy, storefront, and distribution. Gaps are minor—for example, no direct way to list all services with full details without service_list, but that exists. The deprecated tools indicate ongoing migration to a consolidated search surface, suggesting good coverage. A few small gaps remain (e.g., no explicit 'update listing' for buyers, but that may not be needed).

Resources