billingo-mcp

Get NAV Online Számla status

billingo_get_online_szamla_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether a document's NAV Online Számla reporting succeeded by retrieving its transaction ID, status, and validation messages. A missing NAV record is not a reporting failure.

Instructions

Returns the NAV Online Számla reporting status of a document: the transaction id, the status, and any validation messages from NAV. Use this to check whether reporting succeeded. Errors (4xx, "NavOnlineSzamla is not found") when the document has no NAV record at all — for example when the organization is not connected to NAV Online Számla, or the document is not subject to reporting. That is not a NAV failure; it means there is nothing to report on.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Document id.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	No
`messages`	No
`transaction_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.3Oct 29, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "properties": {
+    "messages": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "items": {
+            "additionalProperties": {},
+            "properties": {
+              "human_readable_message": {
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              },
+              "validation_error_code": {
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              },
+              "validation_result_code": {
+                "type": [
+                  "string",
+                  "null"
+                ]
+              }
+            },
+            "type": "object"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "transaction_id": {
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Sep 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds valuable context beyond annotations by explaining the meaning of 4xx 'NavOnlineSzamla is not found' errors and clarifying that it indicates no NAV record rather than a failure. Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld).

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 sentences plus an error clarification, front-loaded with return details and usage. No unnecessary text.

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 simple one-parameter input, output schema, and annotations, the description covers what is needed: return fields, usage context, and error behavior. No gaps for calling correctly.

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 one parameter 'id' fully described. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but none is needed.

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?

States a specific verb (returns) and resource (NAV Online Számla reporting status of a document), and lists the return fields. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_document, though the resource is unique enough that confusion is unlikely.

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?

Provides a clear use case ('Use this to check whether reporting succeeded') and explains error conditions, but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool.

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