Invoice numberer

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Numerar facturas

number_invoices

Stamps correlative numbers on every page of PDF invoices in a batch, writing numbered copies to a new folder while leaving the originals unchanged.

Instructions

Stamps a correlative number (F-0001, F-0002…) on every page of each PDF invoice in a batch and writes numbered copies to a new folder. Numera facturas PDF en lote. Runs locally and offline: the PDFs stay on this computer and the originals are not modified.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`end`	No	Last number. Given alone, the first is worked out from the file count
`zip`	No	Also write a ZIP of the numbered PDFs
`font`	No		Helvetica
`x_mm`	No	Distance from that edge, in mm
`y_mm`	No	Distance from that edge, in mm
`color`	No	Number color, #rrggbb	#000000
`merge`	No	Also write one PDF with every invoice joined
`paths`	Yes	Absolute paths of PDF files, or folders whose PDFs are all taken (not recursive)
`start`	No	First number. Defaults to 1
`from_x`	No	Horizontal reference edge	right
`from_y`	No	Vertical reference edge	top
`dry_run`	No	Report which number each file would get, writing nothing
`size_pt`	No	Font size in points
`sort_by`	No	name: natural order (2 before 10). date: oldest modified first. given: as listed	name
`password`	No	Password of protected PDFs. It passes through the chat: ask only if the tool reports locked files. Numbered copies come out unprotected
`template`	No	Number format with one marker: {n:4} pads to 4 digits (0007), {n} does not pad	F-{n:4}
`box_color`	No	Box color, #rrggbb	#ffffff
`background`	No	Draw a box behind the number
`box_pad_mm`	No	Margin between number and box edge
`output_dir`	No	Absolute folder for the results. Defaults to 'numeradas' beside the first file

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false; the description reinforces this by explaining the write goes to copies in a new folder while originals are untouched, and that everything runs locally and offline. It stops short of describing failure modes (locked PDFs, bad paths) or what the tool reports back.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the output destination. The Spanish restatement 'Numera facturas PDF en lote' largely duplicates the title 'Numerar facturas' and is the only wasted line.

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 20-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core behavior and the non-destructive local guarantee but says nothing about what the call returns (e.g., which numbers were assigned, where files landed) or how dry_run output differs. An agent can call it, but not predict the response.

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 95%, so the 20 parameters are already well documented in the schema. The description only adds the numbering-format illustration (F-0001), without explaining start/end ranges, sort order, dry_run, or password handling. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the weight.

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 (stamps a correlative number) with a concrete example format (F-0001, F-0002…), names the resource (PDF invoices in a batch), and states the outcome (numbered copies written to a new folder). There is no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

The scope (batch of PDF invoices) is clear and there are no sibling tools to disambiguate against, but the description never states when to reach for it versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage must be inferred from the scenario rather than being spelled out.

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

number_invoicesA