Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_delete_recurring_invoice

DestructiveIdempotent

Permanently delete a recurring invoice template and cancel pending scheduled generations. Existing generated invoices remain unaffected.

Instructions

Permanently deletes a recurring invoice template of this company and cancels any pending scheduled generations. Invoices already generated from it are not affected.

Endpoint: DELETE /v1/companies/{company_id}/recurring-invoices/{recurring_invoice_id}

⚠️ Read before calling:

  • Fiscal rules, domains simplified, taxes: beel_rules_list with domain, or resource beel://guardrails/.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
company_idYesUnique identifier (UUID) of the company the operation acts on — its identifier, not its NIF. 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 company you do not reach answers `403`, and so does a company that does not exist, so the existence of a company in another account is never disclosed.
recurring_invoice_idYesUnique identifier (UUID) of the recurring invoice template, as returned when it is created or listed. A template of another company answers `404` with `RECURRING_NOT_FOUND`, exactly like one that does not exist.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / recurring_invoice_id / description
      Added value: +"Unique identifier (UUID) of the recurring invoice template, as returned when it is created or listed. A template of another company answers `404` with `RECURRING_NOT_FOUND`, exactly like one that does not exist."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedInput schema / properties / company_id / description
      Previous value: -"NIF (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."New value: +"Unique identifier (UUID) of the company the operation acts on — its identifier, not its NIF. 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 company you do not reach answers `403`, and so does a company that does not exist, so the existence of a company in another account is never disclosed."
  3. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description goes further by specifying the exact destruction scope: pending scheduled generations are cancelled and already-generated invoices are not affected. It does not add auth, permission, or rate-limit context, though those are partly covered in the schema parameter descriptions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and effect, then the endpoint, then a clearly marked warning block. It is appropriately sized and well-structured, though the endpoint and rules pointer add minor vertical length.

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 destructive tool with no output schema and fully described parameters, the description covers purpose, deletion scope, endpoint, and a guardrail pointer. It does not describe the response (e.g., no-content or deleted object), but an agent has enough context to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both required parameters (company_id, recurring_invoice_id) are fully documented with UUID format and 403/404 behavior. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Permanently deletes') and resource ('recurring invoice template of this company'), and immediately scopes the effect by clarifying that pending scheduled generations are cancelled while already-generated invoices are unaffected. This distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like beel_delete_invoice or beel_delete_invoice_schedule.

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?

The description makes the tool's purpose clear but does not explicitly say when to choose it over alternatives such as pausing via beel_set_recurring_invoice_status or skipping an occurrence via beel_skip_recurring_invoice. The 'Read before calling' note points to fiscal rules but is a prerequisite pointer, not usage guidance.

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