Skip to main content
Glama
iseppo

e-arveldaja MCP Server

by iseppo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Find Missing Documents

find_missing_documents
Read-onlyIdempotent

Locate journals, invoices, and bank transactions lacking attached base documents, count missing attachments, and list affected records for audit and reconciliation.

Instructions

Find journals, transactions, and invoices without a directly attached base document. Counts are records without their own attachment — a bank transaction linked to an invoice that has a document is still counted. Item lists show 20 rows per section unless detail="full".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
detailNocompact (default): first 20 items per section, cut sections are marked truncated. full: every item.
date_toNoEnd date (YYYY-MM-DD)
date_fromNoStart date (YYYY-MM-DD)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.29.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / detail
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "compact (default): first 20 items per section, cut sections are marked truncated. full: every item.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv0.25.3
  3. Removedv0.25.2
  4. First observedv0.18.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish the safe read-only/idempotent profile, and the description adds genuine behavioral context on top: the counting rule (linked records without their own attachment still count) and the default 20-row-per-section truncation. It stops short of describing the response shape or any size limits.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the purpose before the counting clarification and the truncation caveat. No filler; each sentence carries distinct 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?

For a read-only, no-output-schema tool this is largely sufficient: it covers scope, counting semantics, and truncation behavior. Minor gaps remain around the exact return structure and how to page past truncated sections beyond setting detail='full'.

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 100%, so the schema already documents detail, date_from, and date_to with the same compact/full semantics. The description merely restates the detail behavior, adding no format or filtering detail beyond the structured fields, 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?

States a specific verb (find) and a precisely-scoped resource: journals, transactions, and invoices lacking an attached base document. The agent can tell this is a completeness/audit-listing tool, though it names no sibling alternative for contrast.

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?

The description clarifies what 'missing' means but never states when to reach for this tool versus the many list_* siblings. Usage is implied by the resource (document-completeness audit), not made explicit.

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