freeagent-mcp-server

freeagent_list_bills

Read-only

Retrieve FreeAgent bills and filter by view, date range, contact, or project to review open, overdue, paid, or recurring payables.

Instructions

List bills from FreeAgent with optional filtering by view, date range, contact, or project

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "freeagent_list_bills"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number to fetch (default 1)
`view`	No	Filter bills by view
`contact`	No	Filter by contact URL
`project`	No	Filter by project URL
`to_date`	No	Filter bills to this date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`per_page`	No	Results per page (default 25, max 100). Check pagination.next_page in the response for more results.
`from_date`	No	Filter bills from this date (YYYY-MM-DD)
`updated_since`	No	Only return bills updated since this ISO 8601 date
`nested_bill_items`	No	Whether to include nested bill items in the response

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv3.0.0Nov 6, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

addedInput schema / properties / page

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Page number to fetch (default 1)",
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / per_page

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Results per page (default 25, max 100). Check pagination.next_page in the response for more results.",
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

First observedv1.3.0Jun 21, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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 without description help. The description adds little beyond that: it does not mention pagination behavior, default ordering, or result size, and the schema alone carries the pagination detail. A 3 reflects context supplied by annotations plus a small filtering hint.

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 no filler, and the filtering capability is introduced right after the verb and resource. It is tightly written, though the brevity leaves some useful nuances unstated.

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?

With nine optional parameters and no output schema, the description should ideally explain pagination expectations and what a bill record contains. The schema already documents pagination via per_page and next_page, so the gap is modest, but the description does not describe return content at all.

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%, so every parameter including view, contact, project, dates, pagination, and nested_bill_items is already documented. The description repeats four of the nine filters without adding format, interaction, or defaulting semantics, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List bills from FreeAgent') plus the scope of optional filters, which is enough to tell it apart from freeagent_get_bill, freeagent_create_bill, and the other bill siblings. It stops short of explicitly naming those alternatives, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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: 'with optional filtering by view, date range, contact, or project' signals that this is a filtered listing call. There is no explicit when-to-use versus when-to-use freeagent_get_bill for a single bill, and no mention of prerequisites or typical workflow.

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

Deploy Server