Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fiken-mcp

fiken-mcp

by gronnmann
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

fiken_get_sale_draft_attachments

Read-only

Retrieve all attachments linked to a sale draft for accessing supporting documentation.

Instructions

Returns all attachments for a sale draft

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": {
      "draftId": "<draftId>"
    },
    "name": "fiken_get_sale_draft_attachments"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
draftIdYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, so agent knows it's safe. Description adds that it returns 'all attachments', but no info on response structure, pagination, or limits.

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?

One sentence, no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with action and resource.

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?

With no output schema, the description should at least hint at what an attachment object looks like (e.g., file name, URL). It simply says 'all attachments' without further structure.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%; description adds no meaning to the lone draftId parameter. The word 'draft' is in the description but doesn't clarify the parameter's purpose or format.

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?

Description clearly states it returns attachments for a sale draft (verb+resource). The name distinguishes it from siblings like fiken_get_invoice_draft_attachments, but no explicit differentiation from fiken_get_sale_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?

No guidance on when to use this vs. other attachment retrieval tools or what a draftId is. Does not mention prerequisites or alternatives.

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