McpStamp Dunning Letters

Record a payment received

payment_record

Record money received against a chased invoice, in whole MINOR units: a part payment lowers what is still chased, a payment that covers the balance closes the ladder and frees the free-tier slot. Returns the outstanding amount.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "invoice": "<invoice>",
      "amount_minor": "<amount_minor>"
    },
    "name": "payment_record"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	No	The date the money arrived, YYYY-MM-DD. Default today
`note`	No	How it was paid, e.g. Bank transfer, or what it was against
`invoice`	Yes	The chased invoice: its id (DUN-2026-0001) or its invoice reference
`amount_minor`	Yes	What was received, in whole minor units

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 6, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
Changed1 schema field changedNov 6, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
First observedOct 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive. The description adds valuable context beyond that: partial payments lower the chased amount, full payments close the ladder and free the free-tier slot, and it returns the outstanding amount. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand side effects.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the action, then explains the two possible effects and the return value. Every phrase earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

The description covers the purpose, the effects on the invoice ladder, and the return value. It does not need to explain parameters because the schema handles that. It could mention prerequisites or error cases, but for a straightforward payment-recording tool, this is sufficiently complete.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters clearly. The description reinforces that amount_minor is in 'whole MINOR units', which matches the schema, but it does not add new semantic meaning that isn't already present. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb ('Record money received') and a specific resource ('against a chased invoice'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like invoice_status (querying) and overdue_list (listing). It also explains the two possible outcomes (partial vs. full payment), making the tool's intent unambiguous.

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 clear context: it is used for payments against a chased invoice. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the context is sufficient for an agent to infer the appropriate scenario. No exclusions are given, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All McpStamp Dunning Letters tools Inspect

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.