Skip to main content
Glama

Red by Big Red Cloud

by io.github.BigRedCloud

Batch Sales Credit Notes

brc_batch_sales_credit_notes
Destructive

Processes sales credit notes in a batch using reconciled product, VAT and Sales-analysis lines. Results are reported per submitted item and partial success is possible. Requires a valid routeToken issued for the matching action workflow. The token remains valid through lookup, preview and the permitted transaction. Placeholder tokens are invalid. A routeToken does not bypass preview or explicit-confirmation requirements. A call without confirmWrite: true returns confirmation_required and a payload preview. confirmWrite: true applies the previewed change after explicit confirmation. Passing preflight is not confirmation. Requires confirmCounterpartyExplicit: true; confirmation is scoped to the counterparty selected for the current preview.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYesBatch items to process. Maximum 20 items per request.
priceBasisNoApplies to every sales invoice/credit note item in this batch. Required when Gross Price Entry is enabled. Use `gross` when unit prices are VAT-inclusive/gross. Use `net` when unit prices are VAT-exclusive/net.
routeTokenYesOpaque routeToken from brc_route_request for this action workflow. Required for transactional tools. Routing permission only — does not replace preview-before-posting or confirmWrite.
companyNameYesCompany context name, for example YOUR-COMPANY-NAME.
confirmWriteNoMust be true only after a plain-English preview before posting has been shown in the current conversation and the user explicitly confirmed posting (for example yes, create it / post it now / confirm). Never set true on the first call or because the user initially asked to create something. Nothing is written to Big Red Cloud until you confirm.
connectionRefNoOpaque Red connection reference returned by brc_confirm_company_connection. Pass this exact value on every later tool call when the MCP client rotates session ids (for example Vibe/Mistral). Keep reusing the same connectionRef after successful tool calls — do not start a new connection because a lookup returned empty or partial data. It is not an API key and does not contain credentials.
confirmCrAnalysisCategoryNoApplies to every sales document item in this batch. Set true only after the user confirms a CR (customer) sales analysis account code is intentional for these product lines.
confirmCounterpartyExplicitNoMust be true only after the user explicitly named or confirmed the customer, supplier, or other counterparty in the current conversation. Never set true because a customer or supplier appeared in an earlier preview, was inferred from context, or was filled in without the user's explicit choice in this conversation.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true; the description carries the real burden and succeeds fully. It discloses partial success with per-item results, the token validity window, that tokens never bypass preview/confirmation, the two-phase confirmWrite flow, and that passing preflight is not confirmation. This is exemplary disclosure for a destructive batch tool.

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 description is long — nine sentences — but it is front-loaded with the core purpose and every sentence carries a distinct operational fact. There is mild overlap between 'does not bypass preview or explicit-confirmation' and 'passing preflight is not confirmation'. For a high-stakes destructive batch tool, the density is justified.

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 gives a useful-level statement of results (per-item reporting, partial success possible) without overpromising. The safety protocol — preview, explicit confirmation, counterparty confirmation, token requirements — is thoroughly covered. Minor gap: the 20-item batch cap lives only in the schema, and detailed return structure is absent, but the description does its job.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema. It explains routeToken lifecycle (valid through lookup, preview, transaction; placeholders invalid), the confirmWrite two-step semantics, and counterparty-confirmation scoping. This enriches the short schema field descriptions.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource — 'Processes sales credit notes' — and immediately scopes it as a batch operation, distinguishing it from single-document siblings like brc_create_sales_credit_note. The mention of reconciled product, VAT and Sales-analysis lines adds precision about what the batch consumes. The purpose is unambiguous and differentiated.

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?

Gives very clear workflow context: a first call returns confirmation_required plus a payload preview, and confirmWrite: true may only follow explicit user confirmation. It also pins down prerequisites — a valid routeToken for the matching action workflow and confirmCounterpartyExplicit: true. It names no alternative tool or explicit exclusion, so it stops just short of full when-to-use-vs-sibling guidance.

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

All Red by Big Red Cloud toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have a clear single resource-and-action focus, and the systematic naming helps an agent separate create/get/update/delete/list operations. The main confusion risks are the help/search cluster (red_help, find_help_resources, get_help_resource_details) and the payment/cash-payment/batch-payment variants, which require careful reading of the descriptions to avoid misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

The brc_ prefix with snake_case verb_noun naming is used consistently across the vast majority of tools, e.g. brc_list_customers, brc_create_sales_invoice, brc_delete_purchase. A few noun-style names like brc_company_readiness_check, brc_grouped_nominal_accounts_report, and brc_red_help break the pattern, but these are minor deviations.

Tool Count1/5

159 tools is an extreme count for an MCP server, well beyond the 50+ threshold described as an extreme mismatch. While the accounting domain is broad, the surface is inflated by batch variants, generated-reference variants, and without-dormant list variants that could be consolidated.

Completeness4/5

Core accounting entities have strong lifecycle coverage: customers, suppliers, products, sales reps, bank accounts, quotes, sales invoices/entries/credit notes, purchases, payments, cash receipts, accruals, prepayments, and nominal journal batches all support relevant CRUD and batch operations. Minor gaps include the quote update being limited to the reference only, no update/create tools for VAT categories or company settings, and email sending being limited to quotes, invoices, and statements.

Resources