EZ Lawn Biller by Cotlet

Record Payment in EZ Lawn Biller

ez_lawn_biller_record_payment

Read-onlyIdempotent

Record Payment 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_record_payment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=true, and the description is consistent with them, reinforcing that it 'opens nothing by itself.' It adds useful context beyond the annotations: the return shape (step-by-step screens, buttons, fields) and the absence of a public EZ Lawn Biller API, which explains why browser automation is required.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core behavior is front-loaded and clear, but the API research paragraph (404s on /api, /developers, /docs, QuickBooks named in the FAQ) is verbose relative to what an agent needs to invoke the tool, even if it usefully justifies the browser fallback.

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 input parameters and no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what comes back, and it does so (step-by-step instructions plus the follow-up path with cotlet_browser_* tools). What remains unsaid is whether the returned steps are account-specific or generic.

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 convey and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed, keeping the call signature unambiguous.

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 and resource (record a payment in EZ Lawn Biller) and immediately clarifies the tool's real output: step-by-step guidance (screens, buttons, fields), not the action itself. That distinction separates it from the browser-action tools it delegates to, though no sibling tool by name is contrasted.

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 clear workflow: call this to learn the procedure, then execute it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's EZ Lawn Biller Cloud Browser. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use conditions or named alternatives among the ez_lawn_biller_* siblings, so routing between lookup tools is left partly to inference.

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?