Skip to main content
Glama

Pronto

by stream.pronto.api

open_payment

Idempotent

Buy a plan for yourself, with no human involved. Step one of two: this quotes the exact amount and binds the purchase to the wallet you will pay from.

You must already have an identity — call register_agent first and send the key as an Authorization header. Call get_plans for the ladder and what each plan raises.

from_address is required and is the wallet the USDC will leave. It is bound now, before the payment exists, because a transaction hash is public the moment it is mined: without the binding, anyone watching the settlement address could take your transfer and redeem it as their own. Only a transfer from the wallet you name here will settle this purchase.

Returns PAY lines with the atomic amount, the token, the network and the address to pay. Transfer it, then call settle_payment with the transaction hash.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
planYesThe plan to buy. Enterprise is a design partner engagement and cannot be bought here.
cycleNoBilling cycle. Defaults to monthly.
from_addressYesThe EVM address the USDC will be sent from, 0x followed by 40 hex characters. Binding, and required.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations, explaining that the wallet is bound before payment exists, why that binding is needed (public transaction hashes), and what the returned PAY lines contain. There is no contradiction with the annotations: readOnlyHint=false is consistent with buying, and idempotentHint=true is not contradicted by the described behavior.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is longer than average but well structured: purpose, prerequisites, key parameter rationale, and next step each get their own section. The security explanation is detailed but relevant to why from_address is required. It earns its length without being bloated.

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?

For a two-step payment tool with no output schema, the description covers the prerequisites, the exact result (PAY lines with amount, token, network, address), and the next action (transfer then call settle_payment). Nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful extra meaning for from_address by explaining that it is the wallet the USDC will leave, that it is binding, and why this matters. It does not add much for plan or cycle, but the schema already documents those clearly.

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 states a specific action ('Buy a plan') with a clear resource and scope ('for yourself'), and differentiates itself from settle_payment as 'Step one of two'. It also references register_agent and get_plans as prerequisites, making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools.

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?

The description explicitly says to call register_agent first, use get_plans for available plans, and settle_payment afterward with the transaction hash. This gives clear when-to-use and sequencing guidance that is not inferable from the schema alone.

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

All Pronto 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

A4.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_signal re-reads a known row, get_latest_signals fetches by time, scope_signals filters by facets, search_signals matches words, and get_related_signals follows links. The overlapping pairs like get_facet_manifest/list_facets and get_fused_signal/list_fusion_products are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions, so an agent should not confuse them.

Naming Consistency5/5

The naming follows a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: get_ for direct fetches, list_ for catalog-style enumeration, register_ for identity creation, and scope_/search_ for query actions. The slight difference between get_fused_signal and list_fusion_products is meaningful and the verbs remain predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Thirteen tools is well within the sweet spot and each one covers a distinct capability: live reads, lookup by id, lexical search, facet filtering, related signals, fused products, catalogues, plans, billing, and agent registration. There is no obvious padding or excessive fragmentation.

Completeness5/5

The surface fully covers the domain: discovering the vocabulary, selecting signals, searching, fetching by id, following relationships, computing derived products, listing sources, and checking billing/plans. The only gaps would be account claiming and credential rotation, but those are explicitly deferred to external parties, so they are not tool-set gaps.

Resources