Mercury Multiorg MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_invoices

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve accounts-receivable invoices filtered by status and invoice-date range to locate invoice IDs or narrow down results.

Instructions

List accounts-receivable invoices, optionally by status and invoice-date range.

    Use this to find invoice ids or filter invoices; use `get_invoice` for
    one invoice's line items and service period, and
    `list_invoice_attachments` for its files. The API has no filters on
    this endpoint, so any `status`, `start`, or `end` walks every invoice
    before filtering here (`limit` then caps the matches); an unknown
    `status` is an error listing the allowed values, before any request.
    `slug` (the public pay-page token) is not returned; use
    `get_invoice_pdf` (when enabled) for the document.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`end`	No	Latest invoiceDate, YYYY-MM-DD (inclusive).
`limit`	No	Maximum invoices to return.
`start`	No	Earliest invoiceDate, YYYY-MM-DD (inclusive).
`entity`	Yes	Exact `entity` key from `list_entities`, not its `display_name`. Required; there is no default.
`status`	No	Restrict to one status (matched case-insensitively).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.6Sep 15, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / entity / description

Previous value: -"Entity key from `list_entities`. Required; there is no default."New value: +"Exact `entity` key from `list_entities`, not its `display_name`. Required; there is no default."

changedInput schema / properties / status / description

Previous value: -"Restrict to one status (matched case-insensitively): Unpaid, Paid, Cancelled, Processing."New value: +"Restrict to one status (matched case-insensitively)."

First observedv0.1.4Sep 14, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world. The description adds crucial behavioral facts: no server-side filters (so status/date filtering walks every invoice), unknown status errors upfront, and slug omission. These go well beyond what annotations or schema reveal.

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?

Every sentence earns its place. Purpose, usage guidance, behavioral caveats, and parameter clarifications are packed into a compact, well-organized block. No redundancy, no filler.

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?

Covers purpose, filtering semantics, error behavior, provided/omitted fields, and routes to siblings. With an output schema present, the return structure is covered. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaningful context: entity must be the exact key from list_entities (not display_name), status is case-insensitive, and limit caps the post-filter matches. This clarifies usage beyond the flat schema descriptions.

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+resource (list invoices) and scope (accounts-receivable, optional filters), and explicitly differentiates from siblings get_invoice and list_invoice_attachments. No ambiguity about what it does or how it differs.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (find invoice ids, filter invoices) and names the alternatives with their specific purposes (get_invoice for line items/service period, list_invoice_attachments for files). Also explains the client-side filtering consequence, so an agent can decide based on scale.

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