Skip to main content
Glama
cmendezs

mcp-facture-electronique-fr

submit_transaction_report

Submit transaction e-reporting flows for international B2B sales and purchases, as well as B2C individual and aggregated reports, to the French DGFiP platform.

Instructions

Submit a DGFiP Flux 10.1 / 10.3 transaction e-reporting flow.

Scope: Compatible Solution (CS) mode, no payload validation. See README "Scope" section.

Builds a FRR XML payload conforming to DGFiP Spécifications Externes v3.2 (transaction.xsd / ereporting.xsd) and submits it to the Approved Platform via POST /v1/flows with flowSyntax="FRR".

Use for:

  • International B2B outbound sales (processing_rule=B2BInt, flow_type=IndividualCustomerTransactionReport)

  • International B2B inbound purchases (processing_rule=B2BInt, flow_type=UnitarySupplierTransactionReport)

  • B2C individual transactions (processing_rule=B2C, flow_type=IndividualCustomerTransactionReport)

  • Aggregated B2C reports (processing_rule=B2C, flow_type=AggregatedCustomerTransactionReport)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
flow_typeYesXP Z12-013 FlowType for this e-reporting submission: IndividualCustomerTransactionReport — Flux 10.1 individual B2C or intl B2B AggregatedCustomerTransactionReport — Flux 10.3 aggregated B2C UnitarySupplierTransactionReport — Flux 10.1 intl B2B purchases MultiFlowReport — mixed flow types
issuer_idYesTT-13: SIREN or SIRET of the French taxable entity (déclarant).
sender_idYesTT-8: Identifier of the CS/PDP platform submitting the report.
type_codeYesTT-4: Transmission type code, e.g. '380' (invoice report).
period_endYesTT-18: Report period end date in ISO 8601 format (e.g. '2025-01-31').
issuer_nameYesTT-14: Legal name of the declarant.
sender_nameYesTT-9: Legal name of the sender platform.
tracking_idNoOptional external tracking identifier for this flow.
period_startYesTT-17: Report period start date in ISO 8601 format (e.g. '2025-01-01').
invoices_jsonYesJSON array of invoice transaction records. Each invoice in the `invoices` JSON list must have: Required fields: id TT-19 Invoice number / identifier issue_date TT-20 Issue date (ISO 8601, e.g. "2025-01-15") type_code TT-21 Invoice type: "380" (invoice), "381" (credit note), "389" (self-billed) currency_code TT-22 ISO 4217 currency code (e.g. "EUR", "USD") business_process_id TT-28 Business process ID (e.g. "A1", "A2") business_process_type_id TT-29 Process type: "EREP" (e-reporting), "EINV" (e-invoicing) seller_company_id TT-33 Seller identifier (SIREN, SIRET, VAT number, etc.) seller_company_id_scheme TT-33-1 Scheme: "SIREN", "SIRET", "0088" (GLN), "TVA", etc. monetary_total_tax_amount TT-52 Total VAT amount (decimal string, e.g. "200.00") monetary_total_currency TT-202 Currency code for the tax amount (e.g. "EUR") tax_subtotals TT-54..59 List of VAT breakdown objects (see below) Optional fields: due_date TT-201 Payment due date (ISO 8601) tax_due_date_type_code TT-24 VAT due date code ("3" cash, "4" invoice date, "5" delivery) tax_exclusive_amount TT-51 Total amount excluding VAT seller_tax_registration_id TT-34 Seller VAT number (e.g. "FR12345678901") seller_tax_registration_id_qualifier TT-34-0 Qualifier (default "VA") seller_country TT-35 ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 country code buyer_company_id TT-36 Buyer identifier (for international B2B) buyer_company_id_scheme TT-37 Buyer ID scheme buyer_tax_registration_id TT-38 Buyer VAT number buyer_tax_registration_id_qualifier TT-38-0 Qualifier (default "VA") buyer_country TT-39 Buyer country code tax_subtotals list entries: taxable_amount TT-54 Tax base amount (decimal string) tax_amount TT-55 VAT amount for this category (decimal string) tax_percent TT-57 VAT rate (decimal, e.g. "20.0", "5.5", "0.0") code TT-56 (optional) VAT category code: "S" standard, "Z" zero, "E" exempt exemption_reason TT-58 (optional) Exemption reason text exemption_reason_code TT-59 (optional) Exemption reason code — free-form, not enforced by this server; see VATEX_CODES_EU and VATEX_CODES_FR (NF XP Z12-012 Annex A v1.4, June 2026) for the accepted code list
issue_datetimeYesTT-3: Transmission creation timestamp, e.g. '20250115T120000+0100'.
processing_ruleYesXP Z12-013 ProcessingRule: B2BInt — international B2B e-reporting B2C — B2C e-reporting
transmission_idYesTT-1: Unique identifier for this transmission (generated by sender).
issuer_id_schemeYesTT-12: ID scheme for issuer, typically 'SIREN' or 'SIRET'.
issuer_role_codeYesTT-15: Issuer role code. Use 'MOA' (assujetti / declarant) or 'OD' (obligataire délégant).
sender_id_schemeYesTT-7: ID scheme for sender, e.g. 'SIREN', 'SIRET', 'TVA', '0088'.
sender_role_codeYesTT-10: Sender role code. Use 'CS' (Compatible Solution), 'PDP', 'OD' (obligataire délégant), or 'MOA' (assujetti).
transmission_nameNoTT-2: Optional human-readable name for the transmission.
confirmation_tokenNoConfirmation token returned by a prior pending response.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions building an XML payload conforming to spec, submission via POST to Approved Platform, and that no payload validation is performed. However, it does not cover error handling, authentication requirements, or rate limits, which would be beneficial.

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?

The description is relatively long but front-loaded with the purpose. It uses clear sections and bullet points. Some redundancy exists (e.g., repeating 'B2C' and 'B2B' cases) but overall it remains well-structured.

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?

Given the high complexity (19 parameters, 16 required, nested invoices_json structure), the description is thorough. It covers the XML spec, use cases, parameter details, and refers to external documentation. The existence of an output schema means return values are assumed documented, so no gap there.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description still adds value by explaining the required fields for invoices_json and clarifying the processing_rule and flow_type enums. This goes beyond the schema's structured data.

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 clearly states it submits a DGFiP Flux 10.1/10.3 transaction e-reporting flow, specifies scope (CS mode, no payload validation), and lists four specific use cases. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like submit_payment_report and submit_lifecycle_status.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly provides when-to-use conditions (international B2B outbound, inbound, B2C individual/aggregated) and implies exclusions via sibling tool names. It references a README for scope details, giving clear guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cmendezs/mcp-facture-electronique-fr'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server