mcp-einvoicing-be
Related Servers
Alternatives to mcp-einvoicing-be
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceModel Context Protocol (MCP) server for German Electronic Invoicing (ZUGFeRD 2.x / XRechnung 3.x). Provides tools to validate, generate, parse, and convert invoices compliant with EN 16931 and KoSIT.5080 PyPI2Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceModel Context Protocol (MCP) server for Spanish Electronic Invoicing. Provides tools to generate, validate, and submit invoices across VERI\*FACTU, Facturae/FACe, SII, TicketBAI, and Crea y Crece B2B.2062 PyPI2Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for DACH e-invoicing. Create XRechnung (UBL) and ZUGFeRD 2.3 (Factur-X CII) invoices, validate against EN 16931 rules, extract data from XML, and convert between UBL, CII and JSON formats.674 npm2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceModel Context Protocol (MCP) server for United Arab Emirates Electronic Invoicing (PINT AE / Peppol 5-Corner Model). Provides tools to validate, generate, and explore API specifications for FTA / Peppol interoperability.1746 PyPI1Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceModel Context Protocol (MCP) server for Singapore Electronic Invoicing (InvoiceNow / PINT-SG / Peppol 5-Corner Model). Provides tools to validate, generate, and explore API specifications for IRAS / Peppol interoperability.1744 PyPIApache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceModel Context Protocol (MCP) server for French Electronic Invoicing (NF XP Z12-013). Provide tools to validate, generate, and explore API specifications for PDP/OD interoperability.234Apache 2.0
TDQS
Scored across 50 tools
The tool set has many code-list helpers (list_*/check_*), but each targets a specific code list and descriptions clearly distinguish them. Minor overlap exists between check_icd_code and check_participant_id_scheme_in_codelist, and among Peppol lookup/send tools, but explicit scope wording mitigates confusion.
Almost all tools use snake_case with a verb_noun or verb_noun_context pattern (validate_invoice_be, list_eas_codes, check_eas_code). Some inconsistency appears with domain prefixes (peppol_lookup_participant) and the _be suffix, but the overall convention is predictable.
50 tools is excessive for this domain; many are paired list/check code-list operations that could be consolidated or exposed as a single parameterized tool. The count sits at the rubric's extreme-mismatch threshold.
Core e-invoicing lifecycle is covered: generation, validation, parsing, transformation, code lists, VAT lookup, Peppol discovery, sending, and report validation. Gaps include no full Peppol overlay validation (explicitly out of scope) and no receive/inbox operations, but the surface is largely complete for creation and submission workflows.