Skip to main content
Glama
klodr

mercury-invoicing-mcp

by klodr
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
TypeScript
Remote

mercury_update_recipient

Update an existing payment recipient (legal name, nickname, contact emails, default payment method).

Instructions

Update an existing payment recipient (legal name, nickname, contact emails, default payment method).

USE WHEN: amending a recipient's contact info or default payment method after creation. Useful for re-routing future payments to a recipient via a different method (e.g. ACH → wire) without recreating it.

DO NOT USE: to change the bank account number / routing number — that requires a fresh recipient (security policy on Mercury's side). Use mercury_add_recipient for the new banking info.

SIDE EFFECTS: writes the recipient record on Mercury. Persistent. Only the fields you pass are changed. Mercury endpoint is POST /recipient/{id} (SINGULAR — not the plural /recipients/{id}).

RETURNS: { id, name, nickname, defaultPaymentMethod, ... } — the updated recipient.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoRecipient legal name
emailsNoList of email addresses
nicknameNoInternal nickname
recipientIdYesThe recipient ID
contactEmailNoPrimary contact email
defaultPaymentMethodNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.20.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / contactEmail / pattern
      Previous value: -"^(?!\\.)(?!.*\\.\\.)([A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-\\.]*)[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@([A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"New value: +"^(?:[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]+\\.)*[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]*[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@(?:[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"
    • changedInput schema / properties / emails / items / pattern
      Previous value: -"^(?!\\.)(?!.*\\.\\.)([A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-\\.]*)[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@([A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"New value: +"^(?:[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]+\\.)*[A-Za-z0-9_'+\\-]*[A-Za-z0-9_+-]@(?:[A-Za-z0-9][A-Za-z0-9\\-]*\\.)+[A-Za-z]{2,}$"
  2. Addedv0.15.6
  3. Removedv0.15.5
  4. Addedv0.15.4
  5. Removedv0.15.2
  6. Changed1 schema field changedv0.12.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  7. 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 only cover destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description adds the persistence of the write, the partial-patch semantics ('only the fields you pass are changed'), and a Mercury-side security constraint that forces recreation for banking changes. The singular-vs-plural endpoint warning is an unusual but real implementation gotcha worth disclosing.

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?

Labeled sections (USE WHEN / DO NOT USE / SIDE EFFECTS / RETURNS) with the purpose statement front-loaded. No filler; each block carries decision-relevant information.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates with an explicit RETURNS shape. Together with the side-effect and exclusion notes, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly for a 6-parameter mutation tool.

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 83%, so the schema already documents most parameters and the baseline is 3. The description adds the meaningful semantic that this is a partial update — unspecified fields are left untouched — which changes how an agent should populate the optional params, plus the intent behind defaultPaymentMethod changes.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (update an existing payment recipient) and immediately enumerates the mutable fields. The DO NOT USE section names mercury_add_recipient, so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either schema.

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?

Explicit USE WHEN, DO NOT USE, and named alternative routing: changing bank/routing numbers must go through mercury_add_recipient. The motivating example (ACH → wire re-routing without recreating) makes the selection condition concrete.

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