Skip to main content
Glama

InvoiceParser Pro

Preview: Clear a load allocation

preview_clear_invoice_load
Read-onlyIdempotent

Prepare clearing the exact whole-invoice or printed-line allocation. Clearing a whole-invoice tag retains all line allocations. Requires confirmation. This returns an exact preview and a five-minute confirmation token; it does not apply the change.

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": "preview_clear_invoice_load"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
inputYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, non-destructive, idempotent; the description adds genuinely new behavior: a five-minute token lifetime, that no change is applied, and that clearing a whole-invoice tag retains all line allocations. The one gap is what the "exact preview" actually contains.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed immediately by the scope caveat and the confirmation mechanics. Little waste, though "exact preview" is repeated with no added precision the second time.

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?

With no output schema, the description responsibly states what is returned (a preview plus a time-limited token) and that nothing is mutated. Complete for safe invocation; a sentence on what the preview payload shows would close the last gap.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it does: "whole-invoice or printed-line" maps the null vs. integer meaning of line_item_index, and the retention note explains the whole-invoice case. It does not spell out the invoice_id UUID or the 0-10000 index bound, but those are visible in the schema.

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 scope: prepare clearing either the whole-invoice or printed-line allocation, and explicitly says it does not apply the change. It never names the sibling clear_invoice_load as the follow-through, so the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

"Requires confirmation" plus the five-minute confirmation token make the two-step preview-then-apply workflow clear context for when this tool is used. No explicit exclusion or named alternative is given, so the agent must infer that clear_invoice_load is the applying step.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources