mcp-server-smallinvoice

list_activities

Read-only

Retrieve a paginated list of activity entries with full-text search, filtering, and optional included keys for smallinvoice accounting.

Instructions

Returns list of activities entries

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_activities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`with`	No	Comma separated, optional keys that should be included in the response.
`q`	No	Value for full text search
`filter`	No	Filter expression (JSON)
`limit`	No	Limits the number of items returned. Number in a range [1-200]
`offset`	No	Offset of the first item to return. The offset of the initial item is 0.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., pagination, sorting, or performance traits), so it meets the baseline but provides no extra value.

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 a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the list operation, the description is adequate but does not clarify what 'activities entries' are or how they relate to other resources. Completeness is average.

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%, and the description does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema already defines (e.g., 'with', 'q', 'filter'). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description 'Returns list of activities entries' clearly states the verb and resource. However, among many sibling list_* tools, it does not differentiate its specific scope or purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_activity for a single entry). The description lacks context for appropriate use.

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

Deploy Server