Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
warp-mcp

warp-mcp

by Ringer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get an invoice

bill_get_invoice
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a complete invoice by its ID, including header, line items, tax lines, and payment applications. Get full billing details for a specific invoice.

Instructions

Get one invoice in full: header, line items, tax lines, and payment applications. Use after finding the invoice id via bill_list_invoices. Returns 404 for invoices not owned by you.

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_id": "<invoice_id>"
    },
    "name": "bill_get_invoice"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
invoice_idYesInvoice id (from bill_list_invoices)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to repeat safety. It adds the 404 response behavior, which is useful context beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first describes what the tool returns, second provides usage guidance and error condition. No wasted words, front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

For a simple read operation with one parameter, the description covers what is returned, how to obtain the required ID, and a key error scenario. No output schema needed; fully informative.

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?

Single parameter invoice_id with schema description 'Invoice id (from bill_list_invoices)'. Schema coverage is 100%, so description adds minimal extra meaning; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'get' and resource 'one invoice in full', listing components (header, line items, tax lines, payment applications). Distinguishes from sibling tools like bill_list_invoices (list vs get) and bill_get_invoice_html (different format).

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?

Explicitly says 'Use after finding the invoice id via bill_list_invoices,' providing a clear precondition. Also notes the 404 error condition for invoices not owned by the user, guiding when not to use.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools