mcp-server-smallinvoice

send_delivery_note_by_email

Send a delivery note via email with customizable subject, body, and recipients. The email is sent immediately and cannot be undone.

Instructions

Sends specified delivery note by email (SENDS REAL EMAIL — irreversible)

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": {
      "delivery_note_id": "<delivery_note_id>",
      "subject": "<subject>",
      "body": "<body>",
      "recipients": "<recipients>"
    },
    "name": "send_delivery_note_by_email"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`delivery_note_id`	Yes	delivery note ID
`subject`	Yes	email's subject
`body`	Yes	email's body
`recipients`	Yes	email's recipients
`from`	No	sender's email: if nothing specified, company's default will be applied; possible values: CO - company's email, U - user's email, S - company's SMTP email, CE - central email: no-reply@smallinvoice.com

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds important behavioral context: actually sends a real email and the action is irreversible. This goes beyond annotations, which only set readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description does not contradict annotations.

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?

Single sentence with a critical warning in caps. Efficient but not structured; a bullet list would improve scanability.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not cover return values, error cases, or the fact that the delivery note must exist. Leaves gaps for the agent.

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?

All 5 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Clearly states the action (sends), the resource (delivery note), and the medium (email). The warning 'SENDS REAL EMAIL — irreversible' adds specificity and distinguishes it from siblings like send_invoice_by_email or send_delivery_note_by_post.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Minimal guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like send_delivery_note_by_post. No explicit when-not-to-use or prerequisite conditions are mentioned.

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

Deploy Server