Skip to main content
Glama
idoklad-mcp

idoklad-mcp

by honzsik

Get issued invoice

get_issued_invoice
Read-only

Retrieve complete details of a single issued invoice by ID, including line items, partner information, and prices.

Instructions

Get full detail of one issued invoice (vydaná faktura) by ID, including items, partner and prices.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_issued_invoice"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesDocument ID (not the document number).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and reach profile is covered. The description adds the useful disclosure of what a successful response contains (items, partner, prices), but says nothing about not-found behavior, permission requirements, or whether the detail is priced in a particular currency.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource, the lookup key, and the returned payload in that order; nothing is redundant or padded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description carries enough: it identifies the record type, the key, and the main returned sections, which partially substitutes for a missing output schema. Only the absence of any failure-mode or permission note keeps it from being fully complete.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% and the schema already spells out that id is a document ID rather than a document number. The description only repeats "by ID" and adds no format or range guidance, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ("Get full detail of one issued invoice"), scopes it to a single record fetched by ID, and previews the payload (items, partner, prices). The adjective "issued" separates it from get_received_invoice and get_proforma_invoice, and the Czech gloss "vydaná faktura" helps resolve localization ambiguity, though no sibling is explicitly named.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Use is only implied: an agent can infer this is the detail lookup for a single record, complementary to list_issued_invoices. There is no stated when-to-use, when-not-to-use, prerequisite, or named alternative, so routing relies on the agent's own comparison of sibling names.

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