Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
alga-psa-mcp

alga-psa-mcp

Official
by WYRE-AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

alga_invoices_items_list

Read-only

Retrieve every line item for a specific invoice by invoice ID to inspect charges, quantities, and pricing without pagination.

Instructions

List all line items on an invoice (not paginated).

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": "alga_invoices_items_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds a genuinely useful behavioral trait: results are not paginated, so the caller gets the complete set in one call. It does not mention ordering, permissions, or what happens for an invoice with no items, but the key trait is disclosed.

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?

One short sentence with the resource front-loaded and the non-pagination caveat attached inline. Nothing is redundant and nothing is buried.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the definition covers what it returns (all line items) and that the result is unpaginated, which is the main thing an agent needs. Missing ordering/response-shape detail is minor at this complexity level.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the meaning of the single 'id' parameter. It does this by anchoring it to 'an invoice', clarifying the id is the invoice identifier rather than a line-item identifier — a meaningful disambiguation the schema alone does not provide. Format or example values are still absent.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('line items on an invoice'), which is distinguishable from the sibling alga_invoices_list (invoices) and alga_invoices_get (single invoice). It does not explicitly reference those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource: call this when you need the individual line items of a known invoice. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer alga_invoices_get or alga_invoices_list, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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