Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_issue_invoice

DestructiveIdempotent

Finalize a draft invoice by assigning its definitive number and locking it as immutable, then submit it to AEAT for VeriFactu registration asynchronously.

Instructions

Finalizes a draft invoice of this company: assigns its definitive number from the configured series and makes it immutable.

  • Irreversible: an issued invoice is corrected with a corrective invoice (POST …/{invoice_id}/corrective) or voided (POST …/{invoice_id}/void), never edited.

  • Asynchronous: PDF generation and submission to the AEAT happen after the response, so a 200 means the invoice was accepted for submission, not that the AEAT has registered it. Use wait_for_pdf to wait for the PDF.

  • Nothing to collect: a STANDARD or SIMPLIFIED invoice whose total_to_pay is 0 is issued as PAID, with payment_date equal to issue_date. It is registered with the AEAT like any other invoice, with a total of 0.

Endpoint: POST /v1/companies/{company_id}/invoices/{invoice_id}/issue

⚠️ Read before calling:

  • Fiscal rules, domains lifecycle, records: beel_rules_list with domain, or resource beel://guardrails/.

  • The status names, the proforma lifecycle, and which tool performs each operation. (resource: beel://guardrails/invoice-state-machine)

  • How to tell, before issuing, whether a NIF can issue, and what each blocker means. (resource: beel://guardrails/verifactu-gates)

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
wait_for_pdfNoIf `true`, waits for PDF generation and returns the URL in the response. Adds ~1-2s of latency but guarantees the PDF is immediately available.
idempotency_keyNoOptional idempotency key for this operation. Omit it and one is derived from the request itself, which makes a blind retry safe but also collapses a SECOND, deliberately identical operation into the first for 24 hours. Set it — to an order id, or anything unique per intended operation — whenever you mean to create something that may look identical to what you just created.
attach_source_invoicesNoOnly applies when the invoice has automatic email sending enabled. If `true`, the email sent after issuing also attaches a ZIP (`suplidos_<invoice-number>.zip`) with the PDFs of the source invoices referenced by the invoice's SUPLIDO consolidation lines. Access to sources owned by managed accounts is re-checked with the same rules as issuing, and the request fails synchronously with an actionable error — never a partial ZIP — if the invoice has no consolidation sources (`ATTACH_SOURCE_INVOICES_NO_SOURCES`), a source is not reachable (`ATTACH_SOURCE_INVOICE_UNAVAILABLE`) or a source has no generated PDF (`ATTACH_SOURCE_PDF_MISSING`).

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

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), it discloses genuinely non-obvious traits: the operation is irreversible, PDF generation and AEAT submission are asynchronous so a 200 means accepted-not-registered, and zero-total STANDARD/SIMPLIFIED invoices are issued as PAID with payment_date equal to issue_date. This is exactly the kind of context annotations cannot carry.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then organized under bold labels (Irreversible, Asynchronous, Nothing to collect) that make scanning easy. The 'Read before calling' block with three resource pointers is somewhat long, but each pointer is actionable rather than filler.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials an agent needs: irreversibility, the async response semantics, the zero-total edge case, and where to look for preconditions. Nothing critical is left unstated.

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%, so the schema already documents company_id, invoice_id, idempotency_key and attach_source_invoices in depth; the baseline is therefore 3. The description adds only a light usage hint for wait_for_pdf ('Use wait_for_pdf to wait for the PDF') and does not elaborate on the other parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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+resource ('Finalizes a draft invoice of this company') and spells out the concrete effect: assigning the definitive number from the configured series and making the invoice immutable. This clearly separates it from sibling operations like create_invoice, patch_invoice, create_corrective_invoice and void_invoice.

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?

It gives clear context for when to call it (finalizing a draft) and explicitly names the alternatives for later changes: corrective invoice or void, 'never edited'. It also routes the agent to prerequisite resources before calling. It stops short of an explicit 'do not use this if...' exclusion, so it is not a full 5.

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