BeeL MCP server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

beel_get_representation

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves a company's AEAT fiscal representation status, showing whether the document was generated, signed, submitted, accepted, or cancelled. Use it to monitor progress and catch errors.

Instructions

Returns the state of the AEAT fiscal representation of a company: whether the document has been generated, signed and submitted, and whether AEAT accepted it or it was cancelled.

status: NOT_STARTED, PDF_GENERATED, SUBMITTED, ACTIVE, ERROR or CANCELLED.
Never started: not an error. The endpoint answers 200 with NOT_STARTED, so polling it is always safe.

BeeL API endpoint: GET /v1/companies/{company_id}/representation (reference: https://docs.beel.es)

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>"
    },
    "name": "beel_get_representation"
  }
}

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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

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

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the full status vocabulary and the non-obvious fact that NOT_STARTED is a normal 200 response, not a failure. It omits any note on error responses (e.g. 403 for inaccessible companies, documented only in the schema) or rate limits.

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 state description is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by a compact status enumeration, a single caveat sentence and a reference endpoint line. It is well organized with no filler prose, though the trailing documentation URL is of marginal value to an agent.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return shape; it does so partially by enumerating status values, which is the key field for a polling tool. It does not describe the remaining response fields, but for a single-parameter read with strong annotations this is close to complete.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains that company_id is a UUID that derives the owning account and that 403 hides existence. The description adds nothing about company_id, so the baseline of 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: it 'returns the state' of the 'AEAT fiscal representation of a company', then itemizes what that state covers (generated, signed, submitted, accepted, cancelled). That is clearly distinct from siblings like beel_generate_representation or beel_cancel_representation, though it never names those siblings to make the contrast explicit.

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?

It gives one concrete usage cue — that polling is always safe because an unstarted representation returns 200 with NOT_STARTED rather than an error — which is genuinely useful for deciding to call it repeatedly. However, it never states when to prefer this over beel_generate_representation, beel_download_representation_document or beel_cancel_representation, leaving the workflow context implied.

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

Deploy Server