fiken-mcp

fiken_list_sales

Read-only

List sales records for your company with optional filters by date, contact, sale number, and more.

Instructions

Returns all sales for the company

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "fiken_list_sales"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	No	YYYY-MM-DD
`page`	No
`dateGe`	No
`dateGt`	No
`dateLe`	No
`dateLt`	No
`sortBy`	No
`settled`	No
`pageSize`	No
`contactId`	No	Customer contact ID
`saleNumber`	No
`lastModified`	No
`lastModifiedGe`	No
`lastModifiedGt`	No
`lastModifiedLe`	No
`lastModifiedLt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, confirming safe read operation. Description adds no further behavioral details beyond the basic purpose, but does not contradict annotations.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Extremely concise (one sentence), but at the expense of valuable context. Not as informative as it could be while remaining brief.

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 16 parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. Lacks context about pagination, sorting, filtering, or response structure, leaving agents underinformed.

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 description coverage is only 13%; description does not add any parameter meanings. With 16 parameters, most lack any description in both schema and tool description, leaving agents uninformed about parameter semantics.

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?

Clearly states it returns all sales for the company, distinguishing it from single sale retrieval or draft listing by implication. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like fiken_get_sale or fiken_list_sale_drafts.

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 versus alternatives. No mention of pagination, filtering, or appropriate contexts despite having many optional parameters.

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

Deploy Server