Skip to main content
Glama

Timix.AI

by ai.timix

void_invoice

Void an issued invoice (reason required): releases source hours back to Approved and retains the immutable void record. IRREVERSIBLE. 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
reasonYesRequired reason for voiding (recorded in the audit trail).
invoice_idYesId of the issued invoice to void.
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

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden of transparency. It discloses irreversibility, the preview-commit workflow, token expiration (~10 minutes), and idempotency behavior—all critical for correct invocation.

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 with zero fluff; front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by critical usage details. Every word 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?

Despite no output schema, the description covers the workflow, side effects, and parameter usage comprehensively. It could mention what the preview returns (the confirm_token) more explicitly, but overall it's sufficient for safe invocation.

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 the preview-commit flow and the roles of confirm_token and idempotency_key beyond their schema descriptions, elevating understanding.

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 action ('Void an issued invoice') and resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'mark_invoice_paid' or 'send_invoice' by detailing the specific effects (releasing hours back to Approved, retaining immutable void record).

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?

The description provides explicit usage instructions: call once with no token to preview, then re-call with confirm_token and idempotency_key to commit. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the pattern is clearly actionable.

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