Skip to main content
Glama

Timix.AI

by ai.timix

issue_invoice

Issue a Draft invoice: assigns a gapless invoice number, locks the invoice as immutable, and marks source hours as Invoiced. IRREVERSIBLE — corrections require void + reissue. Call once with no token to preview; re-call with the returned confirm_token and an idempotency_key to commit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
invoice_idYesId of the Draft invoice to issue.
confirm_tokenNoToken returned by the preview (call this tool once with no token to get it). Required to commit; expires in ~10 minutes.
idempotency_keyNoRequired when committing (confirm_token present): retrying with the same key returns the original result instead of acting twice.

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It fully discloses irreversible nature, token expiration (~10 min), and idempotency behavior. No contradictions.

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: first covers purpose and consequences, second covers usage pattern. Every word adds value, no fluff, front-loaded with key information.

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?

Despite no output schema or annotations, the description thoroughly explains the tool's behavior: two-step workflow, irreversibility, token lifecycle, and idempotency. It effectively covers all essential aspects for correct invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema has 100% coverage, but description adds critical context: confirm_token usage (preview prerequisite, expiration) and idempotency_key role (prevents duplicate actions). This enriches parameter understanding 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 states the specific action ('Issue a Draft invoice'), details the effects (assigns gapless number, locks as immutable, marks hours), and distinguishes from siblings like void_invoice and reissue_invoice by mentioning irreversibility. It clearly identifies the tool's purpose.

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?

Explicit instructions for a two-step process: call without token to preview, then re-call with confirm_token and idempotency_key to commit. Also warns of irreversibility, guiding when to use and when alternatives (void+reissue) are needed.

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

All Timix.AI 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

B3/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have overlapping purposes, e.g., create_time_report and log_time both create a single time entry with near-identical descriptions. There are also many similar getter/list tools that blur together, making it hard for an agent to select the right one.

Naming Consistency2/5

Most tool names use snake_case, but verbs are inconsistent: 'list' vs 'get' for similar operations, 'manage' combines create/update/delete, and 'use_favorite' is an outlier. This pattern reduces predictability.

Tool Count1/5

With 114 tools, the set is extremely large and far beyond a well-scoped server (typical 3-15). This overwhelms agents and suggests many tools could be consolidated or removed.

Completeness3/5

The tool surface covers a broad domain including customers, projects, tasks, time tracking, invoicing, and user management, but there are gaps like no list_users or direct user listing, and some operations seem redundant rather than filling missing functionality.

Resources