BeeL MCP server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

beel_get_recurring_invoice

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a company's recurring invoice template details, including its schedule, template lines, and next generation date so you can review or manage recurring billing.

Instructions

Retrieves the full details of a recurring invoice template of this company, including its schedule, template lines and next generation date.

BeeL API endpoint: GET /v1/companies/{company_id}/recurring-invoices/{recurring_invoice_id} (reference: https://docs.beel.es)

⚠️ Read before calling:

Fiscal rules, domains simplified, taxes: beel_rules_list with domain, or resource beel://guardrails/.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "company_id": "<company_id>",
      "recurring_invoice_id": "<recurring_invoice_id>"
    },
    "name": "beel_get_recurring_invoice"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`company_id`	Yes	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.
`recurring_invoice_id`	Yes	Unique identifier (UUID) of the recurring invoice template, as returned when it is created or listed. A template of another company answers `404` with `RECURRING_NOT_FOUND`, exactly like one that does not exist.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.0Oct 1, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / recurring_invoice_id / description

Added value: +"Unique identifier (UUID) of the recurring invoice template, as returned when it is created or listed. A template of another company answers `404` with `RECURRING_NOT_FOUND`, exactly like one that does not exist."

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.5.0Aug 30, 2026

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."

First observedv0.3.1Aug 25, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds value by disclosing what the response contains (schedule, template lines, next generation date) and by steering the agent to fiscal-rules resources before interpreting the data. It does not discuss error behavior, though the schema descriptions already cover the 403/404 semantics.

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 return contents are stated up front, followed by the endpoint reference and a short guardrails pointer. Every line carries information an agent can act on; nothing is redundant with the name or annotations.

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 read tool with full annotation coverage and complete schema docs, the description supplies enough: what it returns, the endpoint semantics, and where to check fiscal rules. With no output schema, the brief field enumeration is helpful but not exhaustive about the template's full shape.

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% — both company_id and recurring_invoice_id are documented in detail, including isolation and 404 behavior. The description adds nothing about parameter meaning, which is acceptable given the schema does the heavy lifting, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb and resource — 'Retrieves the full details of a recurring invoice template' — and enumerates the payload (schedule, template lines, next generation date), so it is clearly a single-resource fetch rather than a list. It does not explicitly name beel_list_recurring_invoices as the sibling to use for enumeration, leaving that contrast implicit.

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?

Usage context is only implied: an agent can infer this is the detail-view counterpart to listing templates. The '⚠️ Read before calling' block routes to beel_rules_list for fiscal rules and taxes, which is a useful prerequisite pointer, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance versus beel_list_recurring_invoices, beel_get_recurring_next_occurrence, or beel_get_recurring_invoice_history.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server