Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fiken-mcp

fiken-mcp

by gronnmann
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

fiken_get_invoice_attachments

Read-only

Fetch all attachments for a given invoice by providing its invoice ID.

Instructions

Returns all attachments for an invoice

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": {
      "invoiceId": "<invoiceId>"
    },
    "name": "fiken_get_invoice_attachments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
invoiceIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'Returns' aligns without contradiction. However, it does not explain response format, pagination, or limits, leaving open questions about behavior.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose without any extraneous information.

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?

While the tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, the description fails to explain what an attachment is, the nature of the returned data, or how to use the result effectively.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The single required parameter 'invoiceId' is not described at all; the schema has 0% description coverage and the description does not compensate by explaining what invoiceId is or how to obtain it.

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 the action ('Returns') and the resource ('attachments for an invoice'), making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like fiken_get_invoice_draft_attachments.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., fiken_get_invoice which may also return attachment info), nor any prerequisites or context for use.

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