Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
idoklad-mcp

idoklad-mcp

by honzsik
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Search iDoklad API docs

search_api_docs
Read-only

Search the iDoklad API v3 reference for uncovered endpoints such as bank statements, cash vouchers, recurring invoices, sales orders, stock, and webhooks, then use idoklad_api_request to call them.

Instructions

Search the iDoklad API v3 reference for endpoints not covered by other tools (bank statements, cash vouchers, recurring invoices, sales orders, stock, webhooks…). Returns method, path, parameters (* = required). Then call idoklad_api_request.

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_api_docs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryYesKeywords in English, e.g. 'bank statement list' or 'recurring invoice'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds real value by disclosing the return shape (method, path, parameters) and the "* = required" notation the agent will encounter. It does not discuss rate limits, empty-result behavior, or matching semantics, so it stops short of full transparency.

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?

Two tight sentences: the scope and covered subjects come first, then the suggested next call. No filler, no restatement of the name, and every clause carries decision-relevant information.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so adequately by naming the fields returned and the required-marker convention. Only the undocumented limit parameter and the absence of any guidance on empty or ambiguous results keep it from being 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 coverage is 50%: the query parameter is documented in-schema with an example, but limit (default 8, max 20) is undocumented anywhere. The description's examples of searchable subjects help an agent phrase a query, but it never mentions the limit parameter or result-count behavior, so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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?

"Search the iDoklad API v3 reference for endpoints..." gives a specific verb and resource, and the parenthetical list (bank statements, cash vouchers, recurring invoices, sales orders, stock, webhooks) delimits exactly which endpoints this tool covers. The phrase "not covered by other tools" separates it from the sibling list_*/get_* tools without ambiguity.

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?

The description states the selection condition explicitly — use this only for endpoints the other tools do not cover — and closes the loop with "Then call idoklad_api_request," which tells the agent what to do after a hit. Both when-to-use and the follow-up action are spelled out rather than inferred.

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