Skip to main content
Glama
julienchriqui-okkoer

netsuite-mcp-server

netsuite_update_vendor_bill

Update any field on an existing NetSuite vendor bill via PATCH, including header, expense/item lines, custom fields, and billing address. Supports replacing line lists.

Instructions

Update any field of an existing NetSuite vendor bill via PATCH. Supports: header fields (entity, tranDate, dueDate, tranId, memo, currency, exchangeRate, subsidiary), expense sublist (account, amount, taxCode, memo, department, location, class, amortization), item sublist, custom body fields, billing address. When expense[] is provided, uses ?replace=expense to REPLACE all lines (not merge). Same for item[] with ?replace=item.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesNetSuite vendor bill internal ID
itemNoItem lines; when provided REPLACES all existing item lines
memoNoBill memo / description
dryRunNoIf true, return body without calling NetSuite
entityNoVendor internal ID
tranIdNoInvoice/reference number
dueDateNoDue date YYYY-MM-DD
expenseNoExpense lines; when provided REPLACES all existing lines
currencyNoNS currency ID (1=EUR, 2=USD)
tranDateNoBill date YYYY-MM-DD
subsidiaryNoNS subsidiary ID
customFieldsNocustbody_xxx key-value pairs for custom body fields
exchangeRateNoFX rate to base currency
billingAddressNo
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the PATCH method and crucially warns that providing expense[] or item[] triggers full replacement of existing lines via ?replace=expense and ?replace=item. This is valuable behavioral insight. It could also mention error handling or return format, but the key mutation semantics are transparent.

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?

The description is concise (three sentences) and well-structured. It leads with the main purpose, then lists supported fields, and then highlights the critical replace behavior. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (14 parameters, nested objects) and no output schema, the description provides a solid overview of capabilities and the non-merge replacement behavior. It does not describe the response format or potential failure modes, but for an update tool the essential context is present. The dryRun parameter is also documented in the schema, so its absence in the description is acceptable.

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 93%, so the schema already documents most parameters in detail (e.g., dueDate format, taxCode examples). The description adds a summary of supported field groups but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning beyond the schema. It correctly repeats the replace behavior, but that is already in the schema descriptions for expense and item.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's function as 'Update any field of an existing NetSuite vendor bill via PATCH.' This specifies the verb, resource, and method, distinguishing it from create or get operations. It also enumerates supported fields, reinforcing its scope.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides clear context that this is for updating existing vendor bills and hints at behavior when expense/item arrays are provided (replace vs merge). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like 'use create_vendor_bill for new bills,' so it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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/julienchriqui-okkoer/netsuite-mcp-server'

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