Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es

beel_get_recurring_next_occurrence

Read-onlyIdempotent

Preview the invoice the next generation of a recurring template would produce, using current issuer, recipient and series data, without persisting it or consuming numbering.

Instructions

Returns the invoice that would be produced by the next generation of this recurring template, computed from the current issuer, recipient and series data. Nothing is persisted and no numbering is consumed.

Endpoint: GET /v1/companies/{company_id}/recurring-invoices/{recurring_invoice_id}/next-occurrence

⚠️ Read before calling:

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

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.
recurring_invoice_idYesUnique 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.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.9.0
    • 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."
  2. 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."
  3. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld. The description adds key behavioral context beyond annotations: 'Nothing is persisted and no numbering is consumed' and that the result is computed from current issuer/recipient/series data. This meaningfully clarifies the side-effect profile, though auth/rate-limit details remain in the schema.

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?

Three short paragraphs: purpose first, endpoint second, warning third. Front-loaded and efficient, though the endpoint line is partially redundant with the name and the warning is open-ended. Overall tight.

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 read-only, no-output-schema preview tool with rich parameter descriptions and annotations, the description covers purpose, non-persistence, endpoint, and a rules pointer. Enough for correct invocation; return shape is not detailed, but no output schema exists.

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%, with detailed descriptions for both company_id and recurring_invoice_id including UUID format and error semantics. The description adds no parameter syntax or meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('invoice that would be produced by the next generation of this recurring template'), and distinguishes itself from actual generation by noting nothing is persisted and no numbering is consumed. An agent can tell it apart from beel_generate_recurring_invoice_now without opening either schema.

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?

No explicit when-to-use vs alternatives; the description implies previewing the next occurrence but does not name siblings like beel_generate_recurring_invoice_now or state conditions for choosing this over actual generation. The 'Read before calling' note adds fiscal-rule context but is not usage routing.

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