Invoice Duplicate Recovery
Server Details
Computes exact overpayments across caller-supplied approved invoices, payments, and recorded cred...
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Available Tools
1 toolinvoice_duplicate_recoveryARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Computes exact overpayments across caller-supplied approved invoices, payments, and recorded credits, and produces an evidence bundle for requesting vendor credit review. Never sends requests, never asserts legal refund entitlement, and never takes automatic financial action. Price: 0.05 USDC per completed bounded job on Base.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| credits | No | ||
| invoices | Yes | ||
| payments | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds context by confirming it never sends requests and never takes automatic financial action, and it discloses a 0.05 USDC pricing charge on Base. It stops slightly short of detailing the exact output bundle shape, but the non-action boundaries are transparent.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences: intended computation, explicit non-behaviors, and price. The non-behaviors are front-loaded immediately after the purpose. The pricing sentence is separate and could arguably be moved to annotations, but it is one short sentence and earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema, the description could mention what the evidence bundle looks like, but the core invocation semantics and constraints are well covered. The bounded-job pricing is included. The only real gap is a more concrete description of the return value structure, which is partly offset by the clear purpose and non-action boundaries.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries some burden. It names approved invoices, payments, and recorded credits as the inputs, matching the three parameters. However, it does not add meaning about the 'caller-supplied' format (IDs, currency, amount exactness) beyond what the schema itself already documents in each property.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Computes exact overpayments...produces an evidence bundle') and identifies the resource/domain (approved invoices, payments, recorded credits). It clearly distinguishes scope and non-scope, e.g., 'Never sends requests, never asserts legal refund entitlement, and never takes automatic financial action' — no sibling differentiation needed since none exist.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description clarifies exactly when to use the tool: when computing overpayments and producing evidence for vendor credit review. It explicitly excludes use cases requiring sending requests, asserting legal entitlement, or automatic financial action, so an agent knows not to invoke it for those outcomes.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
1 tool update
- First observed
invoice_duplicate_recovery
Frequently Asked Questions
Claiming proves that you control a remote MCP connector. It does not move, proxy, or interrupt the server.
Open the connector listing, choose Claim ownership, and sign in to Glama.
Complete one verification method:
GitHub identity — fastest for official registry listings. For a namespace such as
io.github.alice/server, link the matching GitHub user, then choose Claim with GitHub. An organization namespace such asio.github.acme/serveralso needs that organization to have installed the Glama AI GitHub App and approved its permissions, because GitHub discloses organization membership only to apps it has installed. Use HTTP or DNS when it has not.HTTP challenge — works when you can deploy a public file. Generate a token, publish the exact JSON Glama shows at
/.well-known/glama.jsonon the same origin as the connector, then choose Check HTTP challenge.DNS challenge — works when you control DNS but cannot change the server. Generate a token, create the exact TXT record Glama shows, wait for it to propagate, then choose Check DNS challenge.
After verification, Glama sends a confirmation email and gives you access to listing details, thumbnails, health checks, and analytics. Keep the HTTP file or DNS record in place: Glama periodically checks it and ownership remains verified while the token is discoverable.
The HTTP ownership file has this structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"claim": "glama_claim_..."
}Claim tokens are opaque, stable, and bound to the signed-in Glama account. They contain no email address or other personal information. If Glama can no longer discover a verified HTTP or DNS token, it starts a seven-day grace period before removing claim-based access. Restore the same token during that period to keep ownership verified. Never publish an email address, Glama session token, GitHub token, or connector credential as ownership proof.
If verification fails, confirm that you copied the current token exactly. The HTTP file must be public, return valid JSON with a successful HTTP response, and stay on the connector's origin. DNS changes may need more time to propagate. A claim cannot transfer to a different origin or hostname: if the connector target changes, Glama starts the grace period and the new target must be claimed separately after the previous claim is released.
For a connector linked to the official MCP Registry, registry updates continue to replace its name, description, and URL by default. After claiming, open Manage connector and enable Use Glama listing details as the source of truth if edits made on Glama should be preserved. Categories and thumbnails are always managed on Glama; registry linkage and technical connection settings continue to sync.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
To improve your MCP server's ranking:
Claim ownership of the server listing
Complete the server profile with an accurate description and thumbnail
Provide a test profile so Glama can connect to and evaluate the server
Keep tool definitions clear and complete to earn a high Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS)
Route real usage through the Glama Gateway; more recorded successful server uses also improve the ranking
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Connectors
Mechanically reconcile supplied purchase-order lines, invoice lines and goods receipts under expl...
Recomputes a usage-based bill from a customer-supplied tariff (graduated per-meter tiers, optiona...
Query and manage Mercoa AP/AR bill-pay: entities, invoices, transactions and payment methods.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn accounting-ops agent that reconciles payments against open orders, auto-books provably safe payments through a deterministic policy gate, and escalates exceptions to a human queue with audit trails.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceSelf-serve MCPB demo for accounts payable invoice exception review. It performs deterministic matching across invoice, purchase order, goods receipt, vendor master, invoice history, tax code master, and payment rules.-
- FlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceMatches expected payments (pain.001) against observed booked entries (camt.053) for ISO 20022 cash reconciliation, providing explainable match results with scoring and classification.101-
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables read-only investigation of payment transactions by building normalized timelines, detecting anomalies like duplicate charges and stuck refunds, and creating diagnostic escalations for human review. Never executes or modifies payment actions.-
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
TDQS
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusing it with others. The tool's description clearly defines its exact purpose and boundaries.
A single tool name leaves no room for inconsistency. The name invoice_duplicate_recovery directly mirrors the server's purpose.
The count is below the typical 3-15 range, but the server is intentionally a single-purpose microservice. One tool fully addresses the narrow scope, making it slightly under but reasonable.
The tool completely covers the server's stated function: computing overpayments and producing an evidence bundle. It explicitly avoids actions outside its scope, so there are no missing operations within the defined domain.