Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_get_invoice_preview

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a temporary pre-signed URL for rendering an invoice preview image. The image is generated on first request and cached for later calls, with the URL expiring in five minutes.

Instructions

Returns a temporary pre-signed URL to a preview image (WebP) of the invoice, suitable for inline rendering. The image is generated and cached on first request, so a later call returns the cached image. The URL expires in five minutes and only allows GET.

Endpoint: GET /v1/companies/{company_id}/invoices/{invoice_id}/preview

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.
invoice_idYesInvoice ID

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

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: the image is 'generated and cached on first request,' the URL 'expires in five minutes,' and it 'only allows GET.' This discloses subtle server-side side effects and security-relevant constraints without contradicting the annotations.

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 and front-loaded: the first sentence states core purpose, the second adds behavioral details (caching, expiry, GET-only), and the endpoint line provides a precise reference. Every sentence contributes information with no redundancy or filler.

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 two-parameter tool with both parameters fully documented in the schema and strong annotations, the description covers what is returned, caching behavior, expiry, HTTP method, and endpoint. It does not describe the exact response payload shape (e.g., field name for the URL), but 'Returns a temporary pre-signed URL' is sufficient for an agent to invoke and consume the result 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%, with company_id extensively documented (not the NIF, sole context source, 403 semantics) and invoice_id as a UUID. The tool description itself adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies; the schema carries the burden and does so well.

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 a temporary pre-signed URL to a preview image (WebP) of the invoice.' This distinguishes it from sibling beel_get_invoice_pdf by format (WebP preview vs PDF) and use case (inline rendering), making the tool's purpose immediately unambiguous.

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 implies usage context through 'suitable for inline rendering' and 'URL expires in five minutes,' which suggests it is intended for immediate display rather than persistent storage. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like beel_get_invoice_pdf, nor does it state when not to use this tool, leaving routing partially to inference.

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