Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_get_my_identity

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a valid credential and retrieve the authenticated account's identity: email, name, logo, language, and credential details. A 200 confirms the credential works; a 401 means it does not.

Instructions

Returns the identity of the authenticated principal: the account the credential belongs to, the person's email, name, logo and interface language, and a description of the credential itself. Unlike every other operation, it requires no scope — any valid credential resolves, so a 200 confirms the credential works and tells you which account it belongs to, and a 401 that it does not.

  • account_id: identifies who the credential belongs to, not what it is currently pointed at; selecting a different company with BeeL-Active-Company does not change it.

  • name: resolves as trade_name ?? legal_name of the active fiscal profile, and is null until onboarding creates one.

  • credential: describes the credential the call was authenticated with — its type, the environment it operates on and the permissions it holds — so a client can adapt what it offers instead of discovering the limits through a 403.

  • Caching: responses are never cached (Cache-Control: no-store).

Endpoint: GET /v1/me/identity

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds significant behavioral context: the operation requires no scope, responses are never cached, account_id reflects ownership rather than the active company, name resolution follows a specific fallback, and the credential object exposes permissions so clients can adapt without hitting 403s. This goes well beyond the read-only/idempotent hints.

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 structured with a clear lead sentence followed by useful bullet points and the endpoint. It is longer than minimal, but the added details are substantive for a tool with no input parameters and no output schema, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description carries the full burden of explaining what the tool returns and how it behaves. It covers the returned fields, credential semantics, authentication meaning, company-selection caveats, name resolution, and caching, so an agent has enough context to invoke and interpret the result correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and a fully covered empty schema, so no parameter clarification is needed. The description instead clarifies the semantics of the returned fields, which is appropriate given the absence of an output schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: returns the identity of the authenticated principal. It enumerates the exact fields returned and explicitly contrasts itself with every other operation by noting it requires no scope, which distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like beel_get_account and beel_get_member.

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 indicates when to use the tool: to confirm a valid credential works and to learn which account it belongs to. It explains the 200/401 meaning and notes the no-scope requirement, but it does not name an explicit alternative tool to use instead in specific situations.

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