Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

InvoiceParser Pro

by com.invoiceparserpro
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Connected accounting systems

list_integration_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read safe stored provider/company connection status. Connecting, reconnecting and changing authorization happen on the IPP website.

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": "list_integration_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world. The description adds that the statuses are stored and that connection changes occur externally, but it does not describe the returned status fields or freshness of the stored data.

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 short sentences, with the read operation front-loaded and the external-action boundary stated immediately after. No sentence is wasted.

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 simple read-only status listing tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description gives enough context to call it correctly. It could be slightly richer by hinting at what a status includes, but it is not materially incomplete.

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?

The tool takes one required empty object parameter, so there are no meaningful parameter semantics to explain. The schema coverage is 0%, but because the input is empty there is nothing the description needs to compensate for.

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 clearly states a specific read operation over provider/company connection status, which distinguishes it from the many invoice, client, and export tools in the sibling list. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, keeping it short of a 5.

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 a useful boundary: connecting, reconnecting, and changing authorization happen on the IPP website rather than through this tool. It does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over related read tools like get_ipp_capabilities, but the implied usage is clear.

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

All InvoiceParser Pro toolsInspect
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