Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_delete_series

DestructiveIdempotent

Soft-delete an invoice series to stop using it while preserving its code for issued invoices. Deactivates the series first if still active, ensuring numbering history remains intact.

Instructions

Soft-deletes an invoice series, deactivating it first if it is active.

  • The code is not released: it stays taken after the deletion because it identifies the invoices already issued under it, so recreating a series with the same code answers 409 SERIES_CODE_DUPLICATED.

  • Default series: it cannot be deleted while another active series of the same document type exists — promote that other one first. If it is the only series of its type it is deleted and the type is left with none, a valid state in which issuing without an explicit series_id answers SERIES_DEFAULT_NOT_FOUND.

Endpoint: DELETE /v1/companies/{company_id}/series/{series_id}

⚠️ 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
series_idYesSeries ID
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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • removedInput schema / $defs / UUID / example
      Removed value: -"550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000"
    • 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."
  2. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations, it discloses that deletion is soft, that the code remains taken and recreating it returns 409 SERIES_CODE_DUPLICATED, and that deleting the only series of a type makes the type have no default, yielding SERIES_DEFAULT_NOT_FOUND. It also points to fiscal guardrails about invoice numbering, adding meaningful behavior the annotations cannot convey.

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 core purpose is front-loaded and the side effects are organized into scannable bullets. Every section, including the guardrail resource pointer and docs-search hint, contributes decision-relevant information without fluff.

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?

For a destructive fiscal operation with no output schema, the description covers preconditions, side effects, error codes, the default-series edge case, and gives access to deeper guardrail documentation. An agent has enough to weigh the call and know what to expect.

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 the schema already documents company_id and series_id thoroughly. The description repeats the endpoint path but adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 first sentence states a specific action and resource: it soft-deletes an invoice series, and even clarifies the deactivation-first behavior. This makes it easy to distinguish from siblings like beel_delete_invoice or beel_delete_company.

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 gives clear preconditions for use, especially around default series: it cannot be deleted while another active series of the same document type exists, and it explains the valid only-series state. It does not name a specific alternative tool for promoting a different series, but the context is sufficient to know when calling is allowed.

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