Skip to main content
Glama

Invio Xero MCP

get_xero_outstanding_receivables

get_xero_outstanding_receivables
Read-only

Who owes this business money in Xero right now, and how much - aggregated per contact from unpaid and partially-paid sales invoices (Type ACCREC, Status AUTHORISED). Read-only. Chosen over Xero's own AgedReceivablesByContact report because that report requires naming ONE contact per call and cannot answer an organisation-wide question. Amounts are grouped by currency (a Xero organisation can invoice in more than one) - if currencies has more than one entry, report each currency total separately rather than adding them together. truncated: true means more unpaid invoices exist than this tool scanned; say so rather than presenting the totals as exhaustive. unusableAmountCount (when greater than 0) means that many AUTHORISED sales invoices had no reliable amount-due figure from Xero and were EXCLUDED from every total, count and contact below - say so too, and never treat them as paid off just because they are absent from the numbers. OVERDUE MEANS THE DUE DATE IS STRICTLY BEFORE overdueAsOf, the calendar day this call was measured against: an invoice due ON that day is NOT overdue and is not in overdueTotal, because the customer still has that whole day to pay. timeZone is the zone that day was computed in and timeZoneSource says where it came from: 'organisation' means it is the organisation's own timezone from Xero, and any other value means Xero did not give one and the day was computed in UTC instead, so an invoice due within a day of now may be classified against a date up to a day away from the organisation's own. Do not recompute overdue yourself from oldestDueDate and your own clock - your clock is not the organisation's.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
organisationNoThe Xero organisation to use, by its display name. Only needed if this connection reaches more than one organisation - omit it when there is only one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description goes far beyond them. It explains truncation (`truncated: true`), the meaning of `unusableAmountCount`, the precise definition of overdue (strictly before `overdueAsOf`, not on the day), timezone handling, and explicitly warns against recomputing overdue with the agent's own clock. This is rich behavioral disclosure that prevents misinterpretation.

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 long but every sentence earns its place: it covers purpose, comparative advantage, currency grouping, truncation, unusable amounts, overdue semantics, and timezone intricacies. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and structured logically, with no fluff. The density is justified by the tool's complexity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the full burden of explaining return semantics. It details aggregated per contact, currency handling, truncated flag, unusableAmountCount, overdueTotal, oldestDueDate, timeZone, and timeZoneSource, plus how to present each. It even warns about not treating excluded invoices as paid. This makes the tool fully usable without further assumptions.

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?

There is only one optional parameter (`organisation`), and the schema description already covers it at 100%. The description does not add extra meaning to the parameter itself, but it does discuss output semantics heavily. With full schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description does not need to add more for this single 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 states exactly what the tool does: aggregates unpaid/partially-paid AUTHORISED sales invoices per contact to answer 'who owes this business money in Xero right now'. It specifies the invoice type (ACCREC) and status, and distinguishes itself from Xero's AgedReceivablesByContact report, making the purpose distinct from any sibling tool.

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: this tool is for organisation-wide receivable questions, chosen over a per-contact report. It implicitly indicates when not to use it (if you need a single contact's aged breakdown), but it does not explicitly reference sibling tools like list_xero_invoices or get_xero_invoice. Still, the usage context is clear and useful.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources