Skip to main content
Glama

Omie

by io.github.mcp-dir

omie_create_customer

Cadastra um cliente ou fornecedor (IncluirCliente). Na Omie cliente e fornecedor são o MESMO cadastro; o que muda é a classificação. data é um JSON string com os campos da doc oficial — obrigatórios: codigo_cliente_integracao (sua chave única), razao_social, cnpj_cpf (ou nome + doc pra PF); comuns: nome_fantasia, email, telefone1_numero, endereco, cidade, estado, cep. Pra marcar como fornecedor use tags: [{ "tag": "Fornecedor" }] (ou "Cliente"). Doc: developer.omie.com.br (geral/clientes).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYes
accountNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate it's a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive. The description adds context about data format and tagging, but no additional behavioral traits like idempotency or authentication needs.

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 informative and front-loaded, but could be slightly more concise. It uses bold markers for emphasis and references external docs.

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?

The input is well-described, but there is no output schema and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., created entity ID). References to official docs partially compensate.

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 coverage is 0%, so description carries full burden. It explains the data parameter thoroughly with required and common fields, but does not mention the account parameter.

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?

The description clearly states the tool creates customers/suppliers (Cadastra um cliente ou fornecedor) and clarifies that in Omie they are the same record with different classification, distinguishing it from sibling tools like omie_update_customer.

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 provides guidance on marking as supplier using tags and lists required fields, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like update or delete.

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

All Omie 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

A3.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The core Omie operations are distinct by resource and action, and the descriptions actively call out edge cases like omie_lancar vs omie_create_payable/receivable and transfer vs manual entries. A few pairs (list_payables/list_receivables/list_financial_movements/list_checking_account_entries) still overlap enough that an agent could pick the wrong one on first attempt.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant pattern is clear and consistent: omie_verb_noun with create, get, list, update, delete, settle, cancel, and reconcile. The main deviations are the Portuguese helper omie_lancar and the unprefixed platform-level tools like authenticate, connect, marketplace, and toolkit_info, which break the otherwise regular naming scheme.

Tool Count1/5

With 50 tools, this server is far beyond the 3-15 well-scoped range and sits at the extreme end of the rubric. Most of the tools are individually purposeful, but exposing checkings, payables, receivables, reconciliation, attachments, invoicing, batch upserts, and an entire marketplace platform in one server heavily taxes an agent's tool-selection space.

Completeness4/5

The core financial lifecycle is well covered: create, read, update, delete, settle, cancel, reconcile, unreconcile, transfer, attachment upload, and batch upsert. Minor gaps exist—invoices are list-only, customers have no delete operation, and there is no dedicated get-by-id for checking accounts—but these are workable for the main reconciliation workflows.

Resources