Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es

beel_create_series

Creates an invoice series for a company, setting a unique code, numbering format, and counter reset period while enforcing fiscal guardrails.

Instructions

Creates an invoice series under a company (NIF). The series code must be unique within the company — a code already taken answers 409 — and its format and counter_reset must be able to tell reset periods apart: a MONTHLY reset needs {MM} and a year token, an ANNUAL reset needs a year token.

The first series created for a company is automatically marked as default.

Endpoint: POST /v1/companies/{company_id}/series

⚠️ Fiscal guardrails — read before calling:

  • How invoice numbers are formed, and why numbering can never be rewritten. (resource: beel://guardrails/series-and-numbering)

For the exhaustive rules and worked examples, call beel_docs_search.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYes
company_idYesNIF (company) the operation acts on. It is the only source of context: the account that owns it is derived from it, and the `BeeL-Active-Company` header plays no part. A NIF you do not reach answers `403`, and so does a NIF that does not exist, so the existence of a NIF in another account is never disclosed.
idempotency_keyNoOptional idempotency key for this operation. Omit it and one is derived from the request itself, which makes a blind retry safe but also collapses a SECOND, deliberately identical operation into the first for 24 hours. Set it — to an order id, or anything unique per intended operation — whenever you mean to create something that may look identical to what you just created.
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations (which are generic). It discloses error semantics ('code already taken answers 409'), automatic default assignment for the first series, a warning that numbering can never be rewritten, and points to fiscal guardrails. This is rich, cautionary information an agent needs before calling.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action, then a warning block, then a pointer to docs. Every sentence earns its place: the unique-code rule, the format/reset coupling, the auto-default behavior, and the guardrail reference. No redundant filler, and the structure aids quick scanning.

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 that there is no output schema, the description compensates by noting the 409 response, the automatic default, and pointing to docs for exhaustive rules. It also includes the endpoint. For a creation tool with complex parameter interactions, this is sufficient for an agent to proceed correctly.

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 67%, so some slack exists. The description adds value: it explains the uniqueness requirement for `code` (linking to 409), and the relationship between `format` and `counter_reset` (e.g., 'ANNUAL reset needs a year token'). These are not in the schema defs and help a caller construct valid arguments.

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 opens with a precise verb and resource: 'Creates an invoice series under a company (NIF).' This clearly differentiates it from siblings like beel_create_invoice or beel_create_company, and the mention of NIF aligns with the company_id parameter. The purpose is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides concrete usage constraints: unique series code, the dependency between counter_reset and format tokens (e.g., 'MONTHLY reset needs {MM} and a year token'), and behavior for the first series. It also directs the agent to beel_docs_search for exhaustive rules. It does not explicitly contrast with patch or get variants, but the constraints give clear guidance on when creation is valid.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/beel-es/beel-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server