Skip to main content
Glama

Omie

by io.github.mcp-dir

omie_get_invoice

Read-onlyIdempotent

Detalhe COMPLETO de UMA nota fiscal (ConsultarNF). O omie_list_invoices devolve só o cabeçalho; este traz os ITENS com NCM, CFOP, valor, base de cálculo, alíquota e valor de cada tributo (ICMS, ICMS-ST, PIS, COFINS, IPI, ISS, FCP, DIFAL), os campos de IBS/CBS da Reforma e os totais. Identifique a nota por codigo_nf (o nCodNF que vem do omie_list_invoices) OU por numero + serie. ATENÇÃO: a Omie NÃO identifica a nota pela chave de acesso de 44 dígitos nesta consulta. Precisa do XML da nota (para auditar, arquivar ou mandar pro contador)? Use omie_get_invoice_xml.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
serieNo
numeroNo
accountNo
codigo_nfNo
data_emissaoNo

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint as safe. The description adds useful behavioral context: what data is returned (items, taxes, totals) and the critical caveat that invoices are not found by their 44-digit access key in this query. It doesn't cover error scenarios, but it goes beyond annotations and contains no contradiction.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose, then adds differentiation, identification rules, and a warning in a logical order. The tax list is lengthy but directly tells the agent what will be returned. Each sentence serves a clear function, though the enumeration could be tighter.

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?

Given no output schema and no param descriptions, the description covers the main behavior, sibling differentiation, identification, and a key limitation. It still leaves the account and data_emissao parameters undocumented and does not describe the response shape in detail, which prevents a perfect score.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description is the only source of parameter meaning. It clearly explains codigo_nf and the numero+serie pair, but it does not explain account or data_emissao. It also lacks type or format details for the parameters, so compensation is only partial.

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 starts with 'Detalhe COMPLETO de UMA nota fiscal (ConsultarNF)', clearly indicating it retrieves detailed data of one invoice. It explicitly distinguishes itself from omie_list_invoices (header only) and omie_get_invoice_xml (XML). The purpose is specific, actionable, and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description states when to use this tool: when you need full itemized tax details beyond the header from omie_list_invoices. It gives a clear exclusion: if you need the XML, use omie_get_invoice_xml. It also explains how to identify the invoice (by codigo_nf or by numero+serie) and warns against the 44-digit access key.

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