billingo_get_partnerRetrieve a Billingo partner by its ID to view customer or vendor details for invoicing and account management.
Returns a single partner by id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Partner id. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| iban | No | ||
| name | No | ||
| phone | No | ||
| swift | No | ||
| emails | No | ||
| address | No | ||
| taxcode | No | ||
| tax_type | No | ||
| account_number | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.3Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+ "additionalProperties": {},
+ "properties": {
+ "account_number": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "address": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "additionalProperties": {},
+ "properties": {
+ "address": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "city": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "country_code": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "post_code": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ {
+ "items": {},
+ "maxItems": 0,
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "emails": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "items": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "iban": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "phone": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "swift": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "tax_type": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "taxcode": {
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, and the description adds nothing beyond them. It says nothing about error behavior for an unknown id or whether related data (e.g. addresses, tax info) is included, so it contributes no behavioral value.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, the brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined density.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
This is a simple single-parameter read with an output schema and full annotation coverage, so the safety and return shape burdens are handled elsewhere. The description is adequate, though a note on missing-record behavior would make it complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single id parameter documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The phrase "by id" merely restates the schema and adds no format or constraint detail.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ("Returns a single partner") plus the lookup key, which implicitly separates it from the sibling list_partners. It does not explicitly name the sibling or clarify it is a full-detail read, so it falls short of a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No indication of when to call this instead of billingo_list_partners, nor any precondition such as needing a known partner id. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.