SalesHookAI

Record incoming invoice

createIncomingInvoice

Records a supplier invoice (supplier, number, dates, net/VAT/gross amounts, category, optional project) in the incoming-invoices list. Does not pay anything.

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": {
      "supplier_name": "<supplier_name>"
    },
    "name": "createIncomingInvoice"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notes`	No	Notes
`status`	No	Status: open, paid, overdue, disputed
`category`	No	Category
`due_date`	No	Due date YYYY-MM-DD
`quote_id`	No	Linked quote ID
`vat_rate`	No	VAT rate percent (default 19)
`net_amount`	No	Net amount
`vat_amount`	No	VAT amount
`image_index`	No	Which attached photo is the receipt (0 = first). The photo is stored with the entry automatically.
`gross_amount`	No	Gross amount
`invoice_date`	No	Invoice date YYYY-MM-DD
`project_name`	No	Project name
`supplier_name`	Yes	Supplier name
`invoice_number`	No	Invoice number
`payment_method`	No	Payment method

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 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=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely valuable behavioral fact (no payment is triggered) but says nothing about duplicate invoice numbers, what is returned on success, or what happens to the attached photo beyond the schema's own note.

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, front-loaded with the create action and followed by the non-payment boundary. No filler, and the negative constraint is placed where the agent will read it before acting.

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 15-parameter mutation with no output schema and only one required field, the description covers the what and the payment boundary but leaves the return value (e.g., generated invoice ID) and the meaning of only-one-required-field unaddressed. It is adequate against rich annotations and schema, but not fully self-sufficient.

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 description coverage is 100% across all 15 properties, so per-field meaning is already fully documented, and the baseline of 3 applies. The description does add mild structure by grouping supplier/number/dates/amounts/category and flagging project as optional, but adds no format, validation, or defaulting detail beyond 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?

The description states a specific verb ("Records") and resource ("a supplier invoice") and enumerates the payload dimensions (supplier, number, dates, amounts, category, project), so the agent knows exactly which entity is created. It does not name the sibling updateIncomingInvoice to distinguish create-vs-edit, which keeps 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 Guidelines3/5

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

"Does not pay anything" implicitly scopes the tool to bookkeeping-only entry and steers payment intent elsewhere, which is a useful usage boundary. However, it never states when to prefer this over updateIncomingInvoice or how it relates to the fetch* siblings that surface existing invoices.

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

All SalesHookAI 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?