EZ Lawn Biller by Cotlet

Inventory report in EZ Lawn Biller

ez_lawn_biller_inventory_report

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inventory report in the user's own EZ Lawn Biller account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in EZ Lawn Biller step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's EZ Lawn Biller Cloud Browser. EZ Lawn Biller's official API: No publicly documented EZ Lawn Biller API was found on 11 Nov 2026: ezlawnbiller.com/api, /developers and /docs returned 404, and its FAQ and manual name QuickBooks as the only integration.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ez_lawn_biller_inventory_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false and idempotentHint=true, and the description reinforces the non-mutating nature by saying it opens nothing by itself. It also adds context not present in structured fields: no publicly documented EZ Lawn Biller API exists, so browser automation is the only path. Minor gap: it does not say how the step-by-step content is formatted or how long it is.

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?

The core behavior and the hand-off to cotlet_browser_* tools are front-loaded in the first sentences. The closing paragraph on the absent official API is somewhat long and citation-dated, but it earns its place by explaining why the browser route is necessary.

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 must describe the return value, and it does: step-by-step instructions with screens, buttons and fields. It also explains the follow-up action. What is missing is any sense of what the inventory report itself contains or how the steps map to the report's options.

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 zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to add and the schema is trivially complete. The baseline for a no-parameter tool applies.

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 resource (inventory report) in a named system (the user's own EZ Lawn Biller account) and clarifies the actual output: a step-by-step procedure covering screens, buttons and fields. It is clear about what the tool returns, though it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as ez_lawn_biller_inventory_value or ez_lawn_biller_inventory_checklist.

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?

Explicit sequencing guidance: this tool only returns instructions and 'opens nothing by itself', after which the agent should act with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the Cloud Browser. That covers the when-and-how well, but there is no exclusion telling the agent when a sibling report tool would be the better pick.

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

All EZ Lawn Biller by Cotlet 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?