Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
BeeL MCP server

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_list_invoice_customization_options

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists available invoice PDF templates with their template_type codes and readable labels, so you can choose the correct customization option for a company's invoices.

Instructions

Returns the PDF templates a NIF can be rendered with. For each one, the code to send as template_type in PUT /v1/companies/{company_id}/invoice-customization, plus a name and a short description translated into the language of the user the credential belongs to.

The accepted values are already in the template_type enum; what this operation adds are the readable labels, so you do not have to show MODERN_TABLE to a person. The catalogue is identical for every account and every NIF, so it is not nested under one.

Closed catalogue. This collection is fixed and bounded: it carries no pagination, it takes no page/limit, and every response holds the whole set.

BeeL API endpoint: GET /v1/invoice-customization-options (reference: https://docs.beel.es)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "beel_list_invoice_customization_options"
  }
}

Input 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

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile needs no restating. The description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: the catalogue is identical for every account and NIF (so it is not nested under a company), and every response holds the whole bounded set with no pagination or page/limit. It does not spell out error behavior or exact return field names, but that is minor.

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 one-line purpose, then the practical mapping, then the caveat. The bold 'Closed catalogue.' heading aids scanning. Slightly padded by explanatory clauses such as 'so it is not nested under one' and 'so you do not have to show `MODERN_TABLE` to a person', which are helpful but verge on redundant.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description describes the response contents (code, name, short description translated into the credential owner's language) and states that the full set is always returned. For a zero-parameter, read-only lookup this is everything an agent needs.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description usefully confirms the absence is intentional ('it takes no `page`/`limit`'), which prevents an agent from attempting pagination arguments.

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 first line states a specific verb and resource: 'Returns the PDF templates a NIF can be rendered with.' It distinguishes itself from the sibling beel_get_invoice_customization / beel_update_invoice_customization by framing itself as the catalogue of accepted template values plus their labels, so an agent can separate read-the-catalogue from read/write-the-configuration.

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 says explicitly what the operation is for (getting the `code` to send as `template_type` in PUT /v1/companies/{company_id}/invoice-customization) and clarifies what it adds over the enum itself: readable labels instead of `MODERN_TABLE`. That effectively routes the agent away from guessing enum values, though it never states an explicit 'when not to use' or names a sibling alternative.

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