InvoiceParser Pro

Export saved invoice

export_saved_invoice

Read-only

Download one saved invoice as real Excel or CSV using its current saved corrections and lines.

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": {
      "input": "<input>"
    },
    "name": "export_saved_invoice"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`input`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful content semantics (exports reflect saved corrections and lines, not pending edits) but does not explain delivery mechanics (file returned vs. link) or why idempotentHint=false despite a read-only action.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and target, and every clause (single invoice, real Excel/CSV, saved corrections) adds information. No filler.

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 with no output schema, the description should state how the export is delivered (file payload, download URL, or job result). That is missing, though the content-source clarification covers part of the gap.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries some burden. It does surface the two output formats (Excel/CSV), which maps to the 'format' enum, but says nothing about the required UUID invoice_id or the xlsx default. Partial compensation only.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: download ONE saved invoice as Excel or CSV, using saved corrections and lines. This distinguishes it in spirit from siblings like export_client_invoices (many) and invoice_to_excel (raw conversion), but no sibling is named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'saved invoice ... using its current saved corrections' implies this is for persisting an already-reviewed invoice rather than converting an unsaved one, which hints at when to prefer it over invoice_to_excel. However, no explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternative is provided.

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

All InvoiceParser Pro 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?