Skip to main content
Glama
jdlar1

Siigo MCP Server

by jdlar1

siigo_get_trial_balance_by_third

Generate trial balance reports filtered by third parties in Siigo accounting software. Specify date ranges, account codes, and tax settings to analyze financial data by customer or supplier.

Instructions

Get trial balance by third party report

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
account_startNoStarting account code
account_endNoEnding account code
yearYesYear
month_startYesStarting month (1-13)
month_endYesEnding month (1-13)
includes_tax_differenceYesInclude tax differences
customerNoCustomer filter

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler function that calls the SiigoClient's getTrialBalanceByThird method and formats the result as MCP content.
    private async handleGetTrialBalanceByThird(args: any) {
      const result = await this.siigoClient.getTrialBalanceByThird(args);
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }] };
    }
  • Core implementation in SiigoClient that authenticates and makes a GET request to the Siigo API endpoint '/v1/trial-balance-by-third' with the provided parameters.
    async getTrialBalanceByThird(params: {
      account_start?: string;
      account_end?: string;
      year: number;
      month_start: number;
      month_end: number;
      includes_tax_difference: boolean;
      customer?: {
        identification: string;
        branch_office?: number;
      };
    }): Promise<SiigoApiResponse<any>> {
      return this.makeRequest<any>('GET', '/v1/trial-balance-by-third', undefined, params);
    }
  • src/index.ts:750-766 (registration)
    Tool registration in the getTools() method, including the tool name, description, and input schema definition.
    {
      name: 'siigo_get_trial_balance_by_third',
      description: 'Get trial balance by third party report',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          account_start: { type: 'string', description: 'Starting account code' },
          account_end: { type: 'string', description: 'Ending account code' },
          year: { type: 'number', description: 'Year' },
          month_start: { type: 'number', description: 'Starting month (1-13)' },
          month_end: { type: 'number', description: 'Ending month (1-13)' },
          includes_tax_difference: { type: 'boolean', description: 'Include tax differences' },
          customer: { type: 'object', description: 'Customer filter' },
        },
        required: ['year', 'month_start', 'month_end', 'includes_tax_difference'],
      },
    },
  • Input schema definition for the tool, specifying parameters and required fields.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {
        account_start: { type: 'string', description: 'Starting account code' },
        account_end: { type: 'string', description: 'Ending account code' },
        year: { type: 'number', description: 'Year' },
        month_start: { type: 'number', description: 'Starting month (1-13)' },
        month_end: { type: 'number', description: 'Ending month (1-13)' },
        includes_tax_difference: { type: 'boolean', description: 'Include tax differences' },
        customer: { type: 'object', description: 'Customer filter' },
      },
      required: ['year', 'month_start', 'month_end', 'includes_tax_difference'],
    },
  • Dispatcher case in the CallToolRequest switch statement that routes to the specific handler.
    case 'siigo_get_trial_balance_by_third':
      return await this.handleGetTrialBalanceByThird(args);
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states it 'gets' a report without disclosing behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format is. It lacks details on data retrieval, permissions, or system impact, making it insufficient for a tool with complex parameters.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it front-loaded and easy to parse. However, it's overly concise to the point of under-specification, slightly reducing its effectiveness despite good structure.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the report's output, usage context, or behavioral aspects, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly in a system with many siblings.

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%, so parameters like 'account_start', 'year', and 'includes_tax_difference' are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying a third-party focus, which doesn't clarify parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Get trial balance by third party report' states the action (get) and resource (trial balance report), but it's vague about what 'by third party' means and doesn't differentiate from sibling 'siigo_get_trial_balance'. It provides a basic purpose but lacks specificity about the report's nature or scope.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'siigo_get_trial_balance' or other financial reporting tools. The description implies a third-party focus but doesn't specify use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without contextual direction.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/jdlar1/siigo-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server