Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_disconnect_payment_connection

DestructiveIdempotent

Disconnect a company's stored payment connection by ID to stop auto-invoicing and delete BeeL credentials; provider-side authorization remains until removed externally.

Instructions

Disconnects the payment connection named by {connection_id} of a company that your account owns or manages.

  • Effect: BeeL deletes the stored credentials and auto-invoicing stops at once; charges arriving afterwards are ignored and produce no invoice. Already-issued invoices are not affected.

  • The provider-side authorization is not revoked: to withdraw it, the holder must remove BeeL's access from the provider's own dashboard (in Stripe, Settings → Connected applications).

Endpoint: DELETE /v1/companies/{company_id}/payment-connections/{connection_id}

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.
connection_idYesUnique identifier (UUID) of the payment connection the operation acts on, as returned by `GET /v1/companies/{company_id}/payment-connections`. A NIF can hold several connections of the same provider, so the provider slug alone does not name one. A connection of another NIF answers `404`, exactly like one that does not exist.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.9.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / connection_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Unique identifier (UUID) of the payment connection the operation acts on, as returned by `GET /v1/companies/{company_id}/payment-connections`. A NIF can hold several connections of the same provider, so the provider slug alone does not name one. A connection of another NIF answers `404`, exactly like one that does not exist.",
+  "format": "uuid",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / provider
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Payment provider slug in **lowercase**. Currently only `stripe` (Stripe Connect) is\noperative; `woocommerce` and `shopify` are reserved for future providers.\n",
-  "enum": [
-    "stripe"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "company_id",
-  "provider"
-]New value: +[
+  "company_id",
+  "connection_id"
+]
  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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructive/idempotent/openWorld, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: stored credentials are deleted, auto-invoicing halts immediately, subsequent charges are ignored, and already-issued invoices are unaffected. It also discloses the non-obvious limitation that provider-side authorization is NOT revoked, with a concrete remediation path.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and scope in sentence one, then bulleted effect and caveat, then the endpoint. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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 two-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the action, prerequisites, side effects, non-effects, and the important caveat about provider-side authorization. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% and the schema already documents both UUIDs thoroughly, including 403/404 disclosure semantics. The description only names connection_id in prose and adds no format or lookup detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb (disconnects) and resource (payment connection) plus the required scope (a company your account owns or manages). An agent can distinguish it from beel_update_payment_connection, beel_initiate_payment_connection and beel_list_payment_connections without opening any schema.

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?

Gives clear preconditions (account must own or manage the company) and decision-relevant consequences (auto-invoicing stops, future charges ignored). It also explains the follow-up needed to revoke provider-side authorization. It does not explicitly name sibling tools or say when to prefer this over updating or listing connections, so it stops short of a 5.

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