Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_list_payment_connections

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve payment provider connections for a company to see the provider-side account and status, verifying whether a provisioned NIF has completed its connection.

Instructions

Returns the payment provider connections of a company your account owns or manages, with the provider-side account each one points at and its status. Use it to check whether a NIF you provisioned has completed its connection.

  • A NIF with no connections: answers 200 with an empty list.

  • environment: Test and Live connections are independent, so only the ones living in the mode of the key you ask with are returned; this field states which.

Closed catalogue. This collection is fixed and bounded — one entry per supported provider at most: it carries no pagination, it takes no page/limit, and every response holds the whole set.

Endpoint: GET /v1/companies/{company_id}/payment-connections

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.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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."
  2. First observedv0.3.1

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive), the description reveals edge behavior: a NIF with no connections returns 200 with an empty list, Test/Live connections are mutually exclusive based on the API key mode, and the collection is closed with no pagination. It also includes the HTTP endpoint and documents a 403 rule inside the parameter description, giving rich behavioral context.

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 description is front-loaded with the core action and then uses bolded bullets for edge cases and collection semantics. Every sentence adds distinct value (return shape, empty case, environment, pagination absence, endpoint), with no 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 single-parameter read-only list tool, the description covers the main return fields, the empty result case, environment scoping, the closed bounded collection, and the exact endpoint. Even without an output schema, an agent has enough to invoke it and interpret the response at a useful level.

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% for the single required company_id parameter, which is already documented with its UUID format and a detailed isolation/403 note. The tool description adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: it returns the payment provider connections of an owned/managed company, including the provider-side account and status. It also gives the intended use (checking whether a provisioned NIF's connection completed), which distinguishes it from the mutation siblings like beel_initiate_payment_connection and beel_disconnect_payment_connection.

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 an explicit use case ('Use it to check whether a NIF you provisioned has completed its connection') and clarifies behavioral context such as the empty-list 200, environment independence, and absence of pagination. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, so it stops short of a 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