Skip to main content
Glama
beel-es

BeeL MCP server

Official
by beel-es
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

beel_skip_recurring_invoice

Idempotent

Skip the next scheduled recurring invoice generation and advance the template to the following period without issuing any invoice.

Instructions

Skips the next scheduled invoice generation and advances the generation date to the following period. Nothing is issued.

Endpoint: POST /v1/companies/{company_id}/recurring-invoices/{recurring_invoice_id}/skip

⚠️ 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.
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.
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 cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true); the description usefully clarifies that despite being a mutation, 'nothing is issued', which resolves the apparent tension of a non-read-only tool that produces no document. It also routes the agent to the guardrails resource for fiscal rules, adding context the annotations do not 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 behavioral outcome in two tight sentences, followed by the endpoint and a targeted guardrails pointer. Every element earns its place; the warning block is slightly boilerplate-heavy but relevant.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return expectation by stating nothing is issued and the date advances, and it covers the fiscal-rules dependency via the guardrails pointer. Only the error/auth specifics remain, and those are already in the schema.

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% and both UUIDs plus the idempotency key are richly documented in the schema (including 403/404 semantics). The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 is correct.

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 and resource ('Skips the next scheduled invoice generation') and pins the exact state change ('advances the generation date to the following period. Nothing is issued.'). This cleanly separates it from beel_generate_recurring_invoice_now and beel_delete_recurring_invoice without needing to name them.

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?

The effect implies when to use it (skip one cycle without issuing anything), but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives guidance, no mention of siblings such as generate-now or delete, and no statement of prerequisites. Usage is inferable but not spelled out.

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