solidtime-mcp

solidtime_invoices

DestructiveIdempotent

Manage invoices by listing, retrieving, creating, updating, deleting, copying, downloading, or downloading e-invoices; write actions require explicit confirmation.

Instructions

Invoices. action list, get, create, update, delete, copy, download, download_e_invoice. Professional feature. Writes need confirm.

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "solidtime_invoices"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	No	UTC timestamp like "2000-02-22T14:58:59Z".
`page`	No
`notes`	No
`action`	Yes
`due_at`	No
`footer`	No
`status`	No
`confirm`	No	Set to the boolean true to execute the write. Omit this field for a dry-run preview. false and the string true are rejected.
`currency`	No
`tax_rate`	No
`paid_date`	No
`reference`	No
`invoice_id`	No
`seller_name`	No
`discount_type`	No
`payment_terms`	No
`copy_reference`	No
`discount_amount`	No
`organization_id`	No	Organization UUID. Falls back to SOLIDTIME_ORGANIZATION_ID, then a single membership from GET /v1/users/me/memberships.
`billing_period_end`	No
`billing_period_start`	No
`invoice_recipient_id`	No
`is_eu_reverse_charge`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare destructive=true, openWorld=true, idempotent=true, and readOnly=false. The description adds some useful context by flagging plan gating and the confirmation requirement for writes, but it does not explain what delete destroys, what copy actually copies, or what the download actions return.

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?

The description is short, front-loaded, and contains no obvious filler. Its telegraphic style is efficient, though it is so terse that it borders on under-specification rather than polished concision.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive multi-action tool with 23 parameters, no output schema, and very low schema description coverage, this description is far too thin. An agent still lacks per-action parameter requirements, permission expectations, and return-value behavior for download and copy.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 23 parameters and only 13% schema description coverage, the description needed to clarify parameter meaning. Instead it mostly restates the action enum and the confirm constraint already documented in the schema, leaving related fields such as invoice_id, copy_reference, discount_type, billing periods, and status unexplained.

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 names the resource (invoices) and enumerates the supported actions, so an agent can tell this is an invoice-management tool. It does not distinguish it from close siblings such as solidtime_invoice_recipients or solidtime_invoice_settings, which keeps it from a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The only usage constraint given is 'Writes need confirm,' and 'Professional feature' signals plan gating. There is no guidance on when to choose list vs get vs copy vs download, nor when to use this tool instead of invoice_recipients or invoice_settings.

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

Deploy Server