Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
buchpilot-mcp

buchpilot-mcp

by makririch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list_invoices

List invoices filtered by status, contact, or limit. Retrieve draft, open, paid, or overdue invoices for accounting management.

Instructions

Listet Rechnungen auf. Kann nach Status filtern (draft, open, paid, overdue). Lists invoices with optional status filter.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoNach Status filtern
contactIdNoNach Kontakt filtern
limitNoMaximale Anzahl
backendNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description carries full burden. Only mentions status filter but omits details like pagination, default limit (25), contactId filtering, backend parameter, or response format. Lacks sufficient behavioral disclosure for a listing tool.

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?

Two short sentences, efficient but slightly redundant due to bilingual repetition. No wasted words, but could be more front-loaded with key info in one sentence.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, description is incomplete. Does not mention pagination, default limit, contactId filter, backend purpose, or return structure. Insufficient for an agent to use correctly without additional context.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 75% (3 of 4 params have descriptions). Description adds no extra meaning beyond listing status filter; fails to explain contactId, limit, or the undocumented backend parameter. Does not compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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

Purpose4/5

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

Clear verb+resource: lists invoices with optional status filter. Bilingual text explicitly states function. However, doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like get_overdue_invoices, but as the generic list tool, purpose is clear.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_overdue_invoices, get_invoice). Does not mention when not to use or context for filters like contactId or limit.

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