Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Fatture in Cloud MCP Server and API by Cotlet

by dev.cotlet
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List unpaid invoices in Fatture in Cloud

fatture_in_cloud_list_unpaid_invoices
Read-onlyIdempotent

List unpaid invoices in the user's own Fatture in Cloud account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in Fatture in Cloud step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Fatture in Cloud Cloud Browser. Fatture in Cloud's official API: Yes, Fatture in Cloud has a documented REST API (v2) for issued invoices, clients, received documents, e-invoices to SDI and attachments (checked 14 Oct 2026), but it has no official MCP server.

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": "fatture_in_cloud_list_unpaid_invoices"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The statement that the tool 'opens nothing by itself' overlaps with the openWorldHint=false and readOnlyHint=true annotations, though it usefully clarifies that the tool only returns instructions rather than performing the listing. Nothing is said about permissions, rate limits, or how the guide content is scoped to the user's account.

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 opening clause 'from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent' and the closing note about Fatture in Cloud's official REST API and lack of an MCP server are peripheral to invoking the tool. The behavioral constraint that matters most (returns instructions, opens nothing) is somewhat buried in the middle rather than front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter, read-only guide tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it returns, that it does not act, and which tools carry out the actual work. An agent has enough to call it and follow up correctly.

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 schema declares zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to compensate for. Baseline 4 applies; no parameter meaning is missing.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description does state what the tool returns (a step-by-step guide of screens, buttons and fields) and that it opens nothing by itself, but this sits at odds with the name/title 'List unpaid invoices', which implies invoice data retrieval. An agent reading only the name would form the wrong expectation, and the actual purpose is buried after a marketing-flavored opener.

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?

It specifies the follow-up flow clearly: get the steps here, then execute with cotlet_browser_* tools in the Cloud Browser. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over sibling tools such as cotlet_app_guide or cotlet_apps, and no exclusion conditions are given.

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

All Fatture in Cloud MCP Server and API by Cotlet toolsInspect
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