Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es

beel_disconnect_payment_connection

DestructiveIdempotent

Disconnect a company's payment provider to stop automatic invoicing immediately. BeeL deletes stored credentials, ignores new charges, and leaves already-issued invoices unchanged.

Instructions

Disconnects the payment provider connection (stripe) 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/{provider}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
providerYesPayment provider slug in **lowercase**. Currently only `stripe` (Stripe Connect) is operative; `woocommerce` and `shopify` are reserved for future providers.
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. 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."
  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?

Even with annotations marking this as destructive and idempotent, the description adds substantial behavioral context: it states that credentials are deleted, charges afterward are ignored and produce no invoice, existing invoices are unaffected, and provider-side authorization is not revoked. This goes well beyond the annotations and gives the agent an accurate model of side effects.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core action, and uses bulleted effects that are each essential. The endpoint line is a useful addition, and there is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it covers ownership scope, immediate effects, what persists after disconnection, how to fully revoke provider access, and the exact endpoint. Neither the schema nor the description leaves a critical gap for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains the provider enum, lowercase requirement, UUID format, account derivation, and 403 behavior. The description adds context about owned/managed companies and the provider-side effect, but it does not materially deepen parameter-level understanding beyond what the input 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Disconnects the payment provider connection (`stripe`) of a company.' It goes beyond the title by specifying the concrete effect (deleting stored credentials, stopping auto-invoicing), which clearly separates it from sibling tools like beel_initiate_payment_connection and beel_list_payment_connections.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool through the stated effect: when auto-invoicing for a connected provider should stop. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, so it falls short of a 5, but the context of ownership/managed companies and the distinction between BeeL-side disconnection and provider-side revocation is strong 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