Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
warp-mcp

warp-mcp

by Ringer
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Render invoice as HTML

bill_get_invoice_html
Read-onlyIdempotent

Render an invoice as a branded HTML document for viewing or sharing. Use this when you need a presentable invoice; for structured data, request the invoice details instead.

Instructions

Render one invoice as a branded HTML document (returned as text). Use when the user wants a presentable invoice document; for structured data use bill_get_invoice. A PDF variant exists at GET /v1/invoices/{id}/pdf but is binary — direct users to the portal for PDF downloads.

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_html"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
invoice_idYesInvoice id (from bill_list_invoices)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.2

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide safety profile; description adds that output is HTML text. No contradictions, but lacks details on auth or rate limits.

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, front-loaded with purpose, no unnecessary words.

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?

Adequately explains return format as text, but doesn't detail HTML structure; tool is simple so information is sufficient.

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 has 100% coverage with description for invoice_id; description adds no new meaning beyond what schema provides.

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 it renders an invoice as HTML returned as text, and distinguishes from sibling tool bill_get_invoice which returns structured data.

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 tells when to use (user wants presentable invoice) and when not (for structured data use bill_get_invoice), also addresses PDF variant.

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