Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-ai-fiskalizacija

mcp-ai-fiskalizacija

by Seyn-Labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Prikaži račun

solo_get_invoice

Retrieve detailed invoice data including items, amounts, ZKI/JIR, and PDF link by providing the invoice's hexadecimal ID from the Solo system.

Instructions

Dohvaća pojedinačni račun sa solo.com.hr po njegovom ID-u (heksadecimalni identifikator, ne broj računa). Vraća sve detalje računa uključujući stavke, iznose, ZKI/JIR i PDF link.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "solo_get_invoice"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID računa (hex identifikator iz Solo sustava)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description explains it returns all details including items, amounts, ZKI/JIR, and PDF link, giving clear behavioral expectations. Could be improved by noting if any restrictions (e.g., auth) exist, but sufficient for a simple retrieval.

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, no redundancy. Front-loaded with verb and resource, then details. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given no output schema, description sufficiently describes return content (items, amounts, ZKI/JIR, PDF link). Siblings are distinct (create, list, next number), no missing context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by clarifying that the 'id' parameter is a hex identifier from the Solo system, not the invoice number, which addresses a common confusion.

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 clearly states it retrieves a single invoice by its ID, using specific verb 'Dohvaća' (retrieves) and resource 'račun' (invoice). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying it retrieves by ID and returns details.

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?

Implies usage by specifying the ID format (hex identifier, not invoice number) to avoid confusion, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide exclusions.

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