Skip to main content
Glama
klodr

mercury-invoicing-mcp

by klodr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
TypeScript
Remote

mercury_list_statements

Read-only

List monthly statements for a Mercury deposit account. Each statement has a downloadable PDF URL.

Instructions

List monthly statements for a Mercury deposit account. Each statement has a downloadable PDF URL.

USE WHEN: fetching the URL of a past statement (e.g. for accounting export, audit, or sharing with a CPA). The PDF URL is short-lived — re-fetch it shortly before download.

DO NOT USE: for IO Credit card statements (use mercury_list_credit_statements, which calls the v2 endpoint — this v1 path answers 404 for credit accounts). For Treasury statements use mercury_list_treasury_statements.

RETURNS: { page, statements: [{ id, startDate, endDate, endingBalance, downloadUrl, accountNumber, routingNumber, transactions, ... }] }.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endNoFilter statements to this date (YYYY-MM-DD)
startNoFilter statements from this date (YYYY-MM-DD)
accountIdYesThe Mercury account ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.15.6
  2. Removedv0.15.5
  3. Addedv0.15.4
  4. Removedv0.15.2
  5. Changed1 schema field changedv0.12.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  6. First observedv0.9.1

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover read-only/open-world, but the description adds critical time-sensitive behavior: PDF URL is short-lived and must be re-fetched before download. Also explains the v1/v2 endpoint failure mode.

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?

Structured with USE WHEN, DO NOT USE, RETURNS sections; every sentence adds operational value.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Covers purpose, alternatives, critical failure routing, return shape, and URL lifetime. Complete for the 3-param tool despite no output schema.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description doesn't explain start/end semantics beyond schema, but it names the account scope and implies accountId requirement.

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?

Specifies verb (List), resource (monthly statements), and scope (Mercury deposit account). Explicitly distinguishes deposit statements from credit and treasury statements.

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?

Provides explicit USE WHEN examples and DO NOT USE routing to the two sibling alternatives with a reason (v1 404 for credit).

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