Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

FieldEdge MCP Server and API by Cotlet

by dev.cotlet
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List unpaid invoices in FieldEdge

fieldedge_list_unpaid_invoices
Read-onlyIdempotent

List unpaid invoices in the user's own FieldEdge account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in FieldEdge step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's FieldEdge Cloud Browser. FieldEdge's official API: FieldEdge has an API, but only on request: customers ask for access through FieldEdge's onboarding form and get credentials for an app FieldEdge provisions (checked 8 Nov 2026).

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": "fieldedge_list_unpaid_invoices"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations it states the important behavior that the tool 'opens nothing by itself' and requires an existing Cloud Browser session, plus the API access situation. That is meaningful disclosure of what the call does and does not do on the user's account. Minor gap: it does not say how long or in what format the steps are returned.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The text is a run-on sentence pile: the API explanation is repeated twice in slightly different form and a stale verification date ('checked 8 Nov 2026') is included. The key fact — this returns instructions and executes nothing — is buried mid-sentence rather than front-loaded.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema and read-only annotations, the description does cover the essentials of when to call it and what it will not do. However, it never describes the shape of the returned guidance, leaving an agent unsure what it will actually receive from a zero-input call.

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 nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline applies. The description correctly frames the call as taking no input such as an account or date range.

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 title and opening say 'list unpaid invoices', but the body reveals the tool actually returns step-by-step instructions ('screens, buttons, fields') rather than the invoices themselves. Naming the cotlet_browser_* tools as the execution path does distinguish it from siblings, but the mismatch between the stated goal and the actual output leaves purpose only partially clear.

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?

The description gives a usable workflow: call this first to get steps, then perform them with cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's FieldEdge Cloud Browser. It also explains why no direct API path exists (credentials only via FieldEdge onboarding request), which is real context for choosing this route. It does not explicitly exclude cases, but the sequencing guidance is clear.

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

All FieldEdge 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