BlindOracle

create_job_invoice

Generate a Lightning invoice to enable job payment. Automates billing by creating invoices for specified job types with custom parameters.

Instructions

Create Lightning invoice for job payment @requirement: REQ-MCP-005 - Lightning payment integration @requirement: REQ-PAY-003 - Invoice creation Properties: Autonomy(+0.6), Durability(+0.3)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "job_type": "<job_type>",
      "params": "<params>"
    },
    "name": "create_job_invoice"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes
`job_type`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, security implications, or destructive potential. It simply states the action.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short but includes extraneous text like @requirement tags and properties that do not aid the agent. It sacrifices clarity for brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 2 required parameters with no descriptions, a JSON schema with nested objects, and no behavioral annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to provide enough context for an agent to use it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% with no descriptions for the two parameters. The description does not explain what job_type values are valid or what params should contain. This is insufficient for correct invocation.

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?

The description states the purpose clearly: 'Create Lightning invoice for job payment'. It specifies a verb and resource, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like check_job_status or list_job_types.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites or context.

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