Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

simplepractice-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

simplepractice_get_billing_overview

Read-only

Fetch a SimplePractice Client Portal account's balance due and per-category billing counts without paging collections just to check for charges.

Instructions

Balance due and per-category counts for the Client Portal account. Cheaper than paging the billing collections just to find out whether anything is there.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact returns the slim projection where one exists and strips image URLs elsewhere; "full" returns SimplePractice's whole records.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv0.4.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response shape: \"compact\" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; \"full\" returns every field this server understands. compact returns the slim projection where one exists and strips image URLs elsewhere; \"full\" returns SimplePractice's whole records.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true), so the description's added value is the cost/comparative behavior: it is 'cheaper than paging the billing collections.' That is genuine context beyond the annotations, though it says nothing about auth scope or result size.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero waste; the return contents are front-loaded and the second sentence earns its place by justifying use over the alternative.

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?

For a single-param, read-only overview tool with no output schema, the description conveys what comes back (balance due, per-category counts) and when it beats the alternative. Enough to call it correctly, though it omits return-shape details.

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 the sole 'view' enum is fully documented in the schema, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds nothing about the view parameter, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: returns 'balance due and per-category counts for the Client Portal account.' It implies the distinction from the billing collections listing, but never names the sibling tool (simplepractice_list_billing_items) outright, so differentiation is by inference rather than explicit.

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?

The second sentence gives clear context for use: it is a cheap existence check ('whether anything is there') that avoids paging billing collections. That routes the agent well, though it states no explicit when-not or names the alternative tool by name.

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