Conecto

Record a bill payment

purchasing_pay_bill

Record money paid on a bill: amount (at most the balance, unless keep_excess keeps the rest as a credit with the supplier for purchasing_use_credit), date, method and reference. It becomes partially_paid, or paid when nothing is left. A negative amount records money back from the supplier. When the account keeps books, the payment is posted (accounts payable against the bank, with any exchange difference). books_match_bank_lines can do this from a bank line too. Costs $0.01 per call; nothing if it fails.

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": {
      "bill_id": "<bill_id>",
      "amount": "<amount>"
    },
    "name": "purchasing_pay_bill"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No	When it was paid. Default today.
`note`	No
`amount`	Yes	In the bill's currency, e.g. "250.00". Negative for a refund.
`method`	No		bank_transfer
`bill_id`	Yes	The bill_id purchasing_create_bill returned.
`reference`	No
`keep_excess`	No	Paid more than the balance: keep the rest as a credit with the supplier.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: status transitions to partially_paid or paid, overpayment handling via keep_excess and supplier credit, negative amounts for refunds, accounting postings with exchange differences, and per-call pricing. These are exactly the side-effect details an agent needs for a non-read-only payment mutation.

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 core operation is front-loaded, and most clauses add distinct value. The parenthetical about keep_excess is dense but still informative, and the cost sentence is useful rather than filler.

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?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and basic annotations, the description covers status effects, accounting behavior, refund handling, overpayment behavior, cost, and an alternative flow. It is not fully exhaustive about the note parameter or response shape, but it is substantially complete.

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 57%, and the description adds meaningful semantics for amount limits, negative refunds, keep_excess overflow behavior, and the date/method/reference fields. It does not explain the optional note parameter, but it compensates well for most of the schema-description gap.

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 states a specific action and resource: record money paid on a bill, including amount, date, method and reference. It is clearly not a generic update, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling purchasing_pay_bills batch operation.

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?

It gives useful usage context by naming books_match_bank_lines as an alternative for payments sourced from a bank line. It does not explicitly say when to use purchasing_pay_bills or purchasing_record_prepayment instead, so the alternative routing is helpful but incomplete.

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

All Conecto tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?