Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_get_invoice_customization

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a company's invoice customization settings, including PDF template, accent colour, invoice language, email language, and logo.

Instructions

Returns how the invoices of a company are rendered and delivered: PDF template, accent colour, invoice language, email language and current logo. Customization is a per-NIF property, so each company of the account carries its own.

The catalogue of available templates and suggested colours is served by GET /v1/invoice-customization-options.

Endpoint: GET /v1/companies/{company_id}/invoice-customization

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.

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

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by explaining that customization is a per-NIF property and that each company carries its own settings. It does not mention response envelope or error details, but those are not required given the annotations and simple GET semantics.

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 most important information and keeps each sentence substantive. The per-NIF clarification and the pointer to the options endpoint earn their place. The final Endpoint line is slightly redundant given the tool name, but it is short and helps ground the operation in the API surface.

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 simple one-parameter read operation with no output schema, the description covers the returned fields, the per-company behavior, and the related catalogue endpoint. It does not provide a response format or envelope, but the listed fields give an agent enough to understand the result. The detailed schema description completes the picture.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline of 3 applies. The schema already thoroughly explains company_id: it is a UUID, not a NIF, it is the sole source of context, and the BeeL-Active-Company header is irrelevant. The description's endpoint line reinforces the role of company_id but adds no new parameter-level information.

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: 'Returns how the invoices of a company are rendered and delivered', followed by a concrete list of returned fields (PDF template, accent colour, invoice language, email language, current logo). It also distinguishes itself from the related options endpoint by naming that separate GET route.

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 establishes when to use the tool: to retrieve a company's current invoice rendering and delivery settings. It also routes the user to the separate options endpoint for available templates and colours. It stops short of explicitly stating 'use this instead of update_invoice_customization' or listing exclusions, but the retrieval-vs-catalogue distinction is clear enough.

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