Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
lexware-mcp-server

lexware-mcp-server

by lazyants
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get Invoice

lexware_get_invoice
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a specific invoice from Lexware by providing its UUID. Get detailed invoice data for verification, accounting, or integration workflows.

Instructions

Retrieve an invoice by ID from Lexware.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "lexware_get_invoice"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesInvoice UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.0.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as rate limits, permissions, or what happens if the ID does not exist. With annotations covering safety, the description does not go beyond them.

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?

One sentence, no wasted words. The tool's purpose is immediately clear.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple get operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not describe the return format or any edge cases, which would be helpful for correctness.

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% with the parameter 'id' described as 'Invoice UUID'. The description only says 'by ID', adding no meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Retrieve an invoice by ID from Lexware' clearly uses a verb (Retrieve) and a resource (invoice by ID). It distinguishes from siblings like lexware_create_invoice, lexware_download_invoice_file, etc., which have different actions.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description implies use when you need an invoice by ID, but does not mention when not to use or differentiate from other get methods (e.g., lexware_get_credit_note).

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