de en es ja ko ru zh

xendit-mcp

Name: xendit-mcp
Author: mrslbt

by mrslbt

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

JavaScript

Remote

xendit-mcp

npm version npm downloads MCP Badge xendit-mcp MCP server License: MIT

用于 Xendit 支付 API 的模型上下文协议 (MCP) 服务器。支持印度尼西亚、菲律宾、泰国、越南和马来西亚的账单、付款、余额和交易。

安装

npm install -g xendit-mcp

或者使用 npx xendit-mcp 按需运行。

Related MCP server: rippr

配置

在 Xendit 仪表板注册。
前往“设置” → “API 密钥”并生成一个密钥。
开发环境请使用测试密钥 (xnd_development_...)，生产环境请使用正式密钥。

变量	必需	描述
`XENDIT_API_KEY`	是	测试或正式 API 密钥
`XENDIT_ENABLE_DISBURSEMENTS`	否	设置为 `true` 以启用付款工具（资金划转）。默认禁用。
`XENDIT_ALLOW_LIVE`	否	设置为 `true` 以允许使用正式/生产环境密钥（前缀为 `xnd_production_`、`iluma_production_`、`sk_live_`）。默认拒绝。

Claude Desktop

编辑 claude_desktop_config.json：

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "xendit": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "xendit-mcp"],
      "env": {
        "XENDIT_API_KEY": "your-api-key"
      }
    }
  }
}

Claude Code

claude mcp add xendit -e XENDIT_API_KEY=your-api-key -- npx -y xendit-mcp

Cursor

添加到 ~/.cursor/mcp.json，格式与 Claude Desktop 相同。

工具

工具	描述
`get_balance`	按类型（CASH、HOLDING、TAX）查询账户余额。
`list_invoices`	按状态、日期范围或货币筛选账单列表。
`get_invoice`	获取单个账单详情。
`create_invoice`	创建支付账单并返回支付链接。
`expire_invoice`	使有效账单过期。
`list_transactions`	列出付款、付款划转、退款和费用。
`create_disbursement`	向银行账户或电子钱包发送资金。除非设置 `XENDIT_ENABLE_DISBURSEMENTS=true`，否则禁用。
`get_disbursement`	查询付款划转状态。除非设置 `XENDIT_ENABLE_DISBURSEMENTS=true`，否则禁用。
`list_disbursement_banks`	按国家/地区列出支持的银行和电子钱包。除非设置 `XENDIT_ENABLE_DISBURSEMENTS=true`，否则禁用。

提示词

提示词	描述
`check_balance`	报告账户余额。
`recent_payments`	最近 N 天收到的付款。
`create_payment_link`	为客户生成支付链接。
`unpaid_invoices`	列出待处理的账单。
`daily_summary`	今日支付活动。

资源

资源	URI	描述
支持的银行	`xendit://banks`	印度尼西亚和菲律宾的银行代码。
API 信息	`xendit://info`	Xendit API 详情和速率限制。

查询示例

What's my current Xendit balance?
Saldo Xendit saya berapa?

Create an invoice for Rp 500,000 for "Website design deposit".
Buatkan invoice Rp 500.000 untuk "Deposit desain website".

Show me all unpaid invoices.
Tampilkan semua invoice yang belum dibayar.

当 XENDIT_ENABLE_DISBURSEMENTS=true 时：

Send Rp 1,000,000 to Ahmad at BCA.
Kirim Rp 1.000.000 ke Ahmad di BCA.

List available banks for disbursement in the Philippines.

环境

Xendit 提供独立的测试和正式 API 密钥。测试密钥在 Xendit 沙盒环境中运行，因此不会发生真实的资金转移。正式密钥（xnd_production_...、iluma_production_...、sk_live_...）在生产环境中运行。

安全性

此服务器可以通过 Xendit API 转移真实资金。关键安全保障措施：

付款工具默认禁用。 create_disbursement、get_disbursement 和 list_disbursement_banks 仅在 XENDIT_ENABLE_DISBURSEMENTS=true 时注册。仅在受信任的代理上下文中启用它们，且确保工具输入不会受到不受信任内容的影响。
默认拒绝正式密钥。 除非 XENDIT_ALLOW_LIVE=true，否则启动时会拒绝前缀为 xnd_production_、iluma_production_ 或 sk_live_ 的密钥。请务必先使用开发密钥 (xnd_development_...) 进行测试。
幂等性。 create_disbursement 使用您的 externalId 作为 Idempotency-Key，因此使用相同 externalId 的重试不会创建重复的转账。每次新的付款划转请使用新的 externalId。

即使有这些限制，在批准工具调用之前，请务必审查任何资金转移请求。将模型输出派生的工具输入视为不受信任的内容。

免责声明

这是一个非官方的、由社区构建的 MCP 服务器。与 Xendit 无关联、无背书或赞助。Xendit 是其各自所有者的商标。使用风险自负。作者对因误用、提示词注入或错误导致的资金损失不承担任何责任。

许可证

MIT

Available Tools

6 tools

get_balanceA

Read-only

Get your Xendit account balance. Returns available balance by account type (CASH, HOLDING, TAX).

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`currency`	No	Currency code (e.g., IDR, PHP). Defaults to your account's primary currency.
`accountType`	No	Account type to check	CASH

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds that the tool returns available balance by account type, which is consistent and adds value beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, with no extraneous information. Every word is justified.

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?

Adequate for a simple read tool with full schema and annotations. However, the lack of output schema means the description could add return format details, but it is sufficient.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add new parameter-level details beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., default currency, account type enum).

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'Xendit account balance', and specifies return by account types (CASH, HOLDING, TAX). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_invoice or list_transactions.

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 versus alternatives or when not to use. The purpose is clear, but the description lacks explicit context for selection among siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

get_invoiceA

Read-only

Get details of a specific Xendit invoice by ID.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`invoiceId`	Yes	Xendit invoice ID

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true. Description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating it returns 'details'. No mention of error behavior or what details include.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key information, no redundant words. Efficient and to the point.

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?

For a simple get-by-id operation with one required parameter and readOnlyHint, the description is complete. No output schema is expected, and sibling tools don't require additional context.

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 for invoiceId is clear ('Xendit invoice ID'). Description does not add further semantics beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline of 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?

Description clearly states 'Get details of a specific Xendit invoice by ID' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_invoices which lists multiple invoices.

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 when-to-use or alternatives are mentioned. Usage is implied for retrieving a single invoice by ID, but no guidance is given for scenarios like missing invoice or comparison with list_invoices.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

get_workspace_modeWorkspace ModeA

Read-only

Explain the current Xendit MCP mode, what actions are enabled, and the safest next step to enable more access.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: it discloses that the tool explains the mode, actions enabled, and a recommended next step. This aligns with the annotation and provides useful transparency.

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 a single concise sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose and outputs. Every part is necessary and front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters, is read-only, and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and what it returns. No additional context is needed for correct usage.

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?

With zero parameters, the description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description fulfills it by explaining what the tool does without needing parameter input.

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 explicitly states the tool explains the current Xendit MCP mode, actions enabled, and next step for more access. This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_balance or get_invoice which deal with different resources.

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 clearly implies the usage context: when you need to understand the current mode and possible next steps. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, though given the unique purpose, this is a minor gap.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

guided_setupGuided SetupA

Read-only

Generate a safe Claude Code or Claude Desktop setup snippet for read-only, invoices, or guarded payouts mode. Uses a form when the client supports MCP elicitation.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	No	Desired user-facing mode
`client`	No	Target client
`allowLive`	No	Set true only if you intend to use a live Xendit key
`serverName`	No	Claude MCP server name, defaults to xendit
`maxDailyAmount`	No	Only used for guarded-payouts mode
`allowedAccounts`	No	Comma-separated CHANNEL_CODE:ACCOUNT_NUMBER entries for guarded-payouts mode
`maxDisbursementAmount`	No	Only used for guarded-payouts mode

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. Description adds that the snippet is 'safe' and mentions form elicitation, but doesn't add substantive behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Two short sentences that front-load the purpose. No redundant information; every word earns its place.

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?

With 7 parameters (0 required), two enums, and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality. Could mention output format or more about allowLive context, but siblings are all queries so the role is clear.

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 100% (all parameters documented in schema). Description does not add additional meaning beyond schema, so baseline is 3.

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?

Clearly states it generates a safe setup snippet for three specific modes (read-only, invoices, guarded-payouts). Distinct from sibling tools which are all retrieval/query tools, so no ambiguity.

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?

Provides context about generating snippets and using forms when client supports MCP elicitation, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

list_invoicesA

Read-only

List invoices from your Xendit account with optional filters for status, date range, and pagination.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Number of invoices to return (1-100)
`status`	No	Filter by invoice status
`currency`	No	Filter by currency (IDR, PHP, etc.)
`createdAfter`	No	Return invoices created after this ISO 8601 timestamp. Must be used with createdBefore.
`createdBefore`	No	Return invoices created before this ISO 8601 timestamp. Must be used with createdAfter.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and description confirms read-only listing. Adds filter context but does not explain pagination mechanics or result set behavior.

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?

Single sentence, 16 words, no redundant information. Front-loaded with verb and resource.

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?

Covers basic listing and filters. Missing details on pagination and return format, but for a simple tool with no output schema, it is sufficiently complete.

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 descriptions for all 5 parameters. Description groups filters but adds no extra meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it lists invoices from Xendit account with optional filters, distinguishing it from sibling get_invoice (single invoice) and list_transactions (different resource).

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?

Lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_invoice or list_transactions. No exclusions or when-not-to-use context provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

list_transactionsA

Read-only

List transactions from your Xendit account. Includes payments received, payouts, refunds, transfers, and balance adjustments.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Number of transactions (1-50)
`types`	No	Filter by transaction type
`status`	No	Filter by transaction status
`currency`	No	Filter by currency
`createdGte`	No	Created on or after (ISO 8601)
`createdLte`	No	Created on or before (ISO 8601)

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate read-only, which aligns with the description. However, the description adds no further behavioral details such as pagination, rate limits, or potential side effects.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the main action and includes essential details without unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the purpose but does not describe the return format or any output schema, leaving the agent uncertain about the response structure.

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%, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The description lists transaction types, but they are already in the enum.

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 'List transactions' with the resource and includes a comprehensive list of transaction types, distinguishing it from siblings like get_balance and get_invoice.

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?

While the description implies usage for listing multiple transactions, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_invoice for specific transactions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

9 tool updatesv0.2.0May 25, 2026

Removedcreate_disbursement
Removedcreate_invoice
Removedexpire_invoice
Removedget_disbursement
Addedget_workspace_mode
Addedguided_setup
Removedlist_disbursement_banks

Changedlist_invoices2 fields changed

changedInput schema / properties / createdAfter / description

Previous value: -"Return invoices created after this date (ISO 8601, e.g., 2025-01-01T00:00:00Z)"New value: +"Return invoices created after this ISO 8601 timestamp. Must be used with createdBefore."

changedInput schema / properties / createdBefore / description

Previous value: -"Return invoices created before this date (ISO 8601)"New value: +"Return invoices created before this ISO 8601 timestamp. Must be used with createdAfter."

Changedlist_transactions3 fields changed

changedInput schema / properties / status / description

Previous value: -"Filter by status"New value: +"Filter by transaction status"

changedInput schema / properties / status / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "SUCCESS",
-  "PENDING",
-  "FAILED",
-  "VOIDED"
-]New value: +[
+  "PENDING",
+  "SUCCESS",
+  "FAILED",
+  "VOIDED",
+  "REVERSED"
+]

changedInput schema / properties / types / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "PAYMENT",
-  "DISBURSEMENT",
-  "REFUND",
-  "FEE",
-  "ADJUSTMENT"
-]New value: +[
+  "ADJUSTMENT_ADD",
+  "ADJUSTMENT_DEDUCT",
+  "BNPL_PARTNER_SETTLEMENT_CREDIT",
+  "BNPL_PARTNER_SETTLEMENT_DEBIT",
+  "CASHBACK_FEE",
+  "CASHBACK_VAT",
+  "CHARGEBACK",
+  "CONVERSION",
+  "DISBURSEMENT",
+  "FOREX_DEDUCTION",
+  "FOREX_DEPOSIT",
+  "IN_PERSON_PAYMENT",
+  "LOAN_REPAYMENT",
+  "OTHER",
+  "PAYMENT",
+  "REFUND",
+  "REMITTANCE",
+  "REMITTANCE_COLLECTION_PAYMENT",
+  "REMITTANCE_PAYOUT",
+  "RESERVES_HOLD",
+  "RESERVES_RELEASE",
+  "TOPUP",
+  "TRANSFER_IN",
+  "TRANSFER_OUT",
+  "WITHDRAWAL"
+]

9 tool updatesv1.0.0Apr 14, 2026
- First observedcreate_disbursement
- First observedcreate_invoice
- First observedexpire_invoice
- First observedget_balance
- First observedget_disbursement
- First observedget_invoice
- First observedlist_disbursement_banks
- First observedlist_invoices
- First observedlist_transactions

Deploy Server

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Scored 2026-06-04 04:10 across 6 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: balance retrieval, invoice details, workspace mode explanation, setup snippet generation, and listing of invoices and transactions. No overlap between tools.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern using snake_case (e.g., get_balance, list_invoices). The only minor deviation is 'guided_setup' which is adjective_noun, but it remains clear and consistent with the overall style.

Tool Count5/5

Six tools is well-scoped for a payment service MCP server covering essential read operations, account balance, and setup guidance. It's neither too few nor too many.

Completeness2/5

The tool surface is limited to read and setup operations, missing write capabilities like create/update/delete invoices or payouts. This creates notable gaps for a payment API, restricting agents to passive data retrieval.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Need Help?

Related Servers

Related MCP Connectors

modern-treasury A
io.usefulapi
MCP server for Modern Treasury — payment orders, transactions, counterparties and ledgers.
Finance Payments & Billing
172
codat A
io.usefulapi
MCP server for Codat — companies, connections, invoices, bills and financial statements.
Finance ERP Systems Data Platforms
282
quaderno A
io.usefulapi
MCP server for Quaderno — tax-rate calculation, invoices, contacts, products, receipts & expenses.
Finance Payments & Billing
232
inflowOAuth
ai.inflowpay.app
MCP Server for agents to onboard, pay, and provision services autonomously with InFlow
Agent Orchestration Autonomous Agents Payments & Billing
26

Related MCP Servers

Velo Payments API MCP Server
Finance Developer Tools
ag2-mcp-servers
F
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
An MCP server that enables interaction with Velo Payments APIs for global payment operations, automatically generated using AG2's MCP builder from the Velo Payments OpenAPI specification.
Updated a year ago (2025-07-16 14:36 UTC)
-
rippr
RAG Systems Web Scraping
mrslbt
A
license
A
quality
B
maintenance
Extract YouTube transcripts for AI agents, RAG pipelines, and LLM workflows. Supports any YouTube URL. Returns clean text or timestamped segments. No API keys required.
Updated 2 months ago (2026-07-31 02:31 UTC)
1
4
MIT
rakuten-mcp
E-commerce & Retail Travel & Transportation Search
mrslbt
A
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
MCP server for Rakuten APIs. Search products, books, hotels, and rankings across Japan's largest e-commerce platform.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-07-16 04:29 UTC)
28
94 npm
5
MIT
paper-invoice-mcp
Finance Payments & Billing
igun997
F
license
Not graded
quality
D
maintenance
MCP server for Paper.id Indonesian invoicing and accounting platform, providing 31 tools for partner and invoice management, QRIS payments, and reporting with automatic token refresh.
Updated 5 months ago (2026-05-14 17:57 UTC)
-