Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
freeagent-mcp-server

freeagent-mcp-server

by samaxbytez
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

freeagent_get_category

Read-only

Retrieve a single FreeAgent category by its nominal code to look up category details for expense, invoice, or accounting entries.

Instructions

Get a single category from FreeAgent by nominal code

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "nominal_code": "<nominal_code>"
    },
    "name": "freeagent_get_category"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nominal_codeYesThe nominal code of the category to retrieve

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.0.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / nominal_code / pattern
      Added value: +"^[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+$"
  2. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that and the schema — no note on lookup-by-code semantics, not-found behavior, or what a "category" includes — so it contributes almost no behavioral context of its own.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler — the action and lookup key come first. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter read tool, though the same length could have carried one extra clause of routing guidance.

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?

For a simple singleton read with annotations covering safety, a fully documented single required parameter, and no output schema obligations, the description is sufficient to call the tool correctly. The only gap is failure behavior for an unknown nominal code.

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% and the single parameter already carries a description plus a pattern constraint. The phrase "by nominal code" merely restates the schema, adding no format examples or guidance on where to find valid codes (e.g., via freeagent_list_categories); baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource ("Get a single category") plus the lookup key ("by nominal code"), which implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling list tools freeagent_list_categories and freeagent_list_business_categories. It does not name those siblings explicitly, so differentiation relies on inference.

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?

Usage is only implied: the word "single" suggests this is for a known item where a list would be wasteful, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer the list variants, and no statement about behavior if the nominal code doesn't exist.

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