AIProcurement.club — Procurement Agents

Read saved invoice evidence

procurement_invoice__evidence

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read existing same-organization procurement records and their direct saved relationships. Requires the existing p2p:read scope; a Services-only key cannot read these records. Does not upload files, invoke inference, approve a purchase or transfer money.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "procurement_invoice__evidence"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and openWorld behavior, so the description does not need to repeat safety basics. It adds real value by disclosing the required p2p:read scope, the Services-only key restriction, same-organization data isolation, and explicit non-actions such as not uploading files or transferring money.

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 short and front-loaded, stating the core read operation first and then auth constraints and boundaries. The non-action list is slightly boilerplate but still useful and does not bloat the definition.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple one-parameter read tool, the description covers auth, data scope, and non-actions, and it broadly says it returns records and direct relationships. However, without an output schema, it should explain the return shape more clearly, and it leaves the required id parameter under-specified.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema has one required 'id' parameter with UUID format but zero description coverage, and the description never mentions what the id identifies—invoice ID, record ID, or evidence ID. With low schema coverage, the description should compensate, but here the only clue comes from the tool name and title.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('existing same-organization procurement records and their direct saved relationships'), but it never uses 'invoice' or 'evidence' even though the tool is named procurement_invoice__evidence. It also fails to distinguish this tool from close siblings such as procurement_purchase_order__evidence or procurement_artifact__get.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description states an auth prerequisite ('Requires the existing p2p:read scope') and a key-type limitation ('a Services-only key cannot read these records'), which is useful operational context. However, it gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling read tools like procurement_artifact__get or procurement_purchase_order__evidence.

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

All AIProcurement.club — Procurement Agents 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?