Skip to main content
Glama
stornoro

Storno CLI

by stornoro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

dosare_document

Generates rental termination documents (agreement, notice, addendum, or landlord's statement) with prefilled fields for review or PDF output with overrides.

Instructions

Generate a legal document from a rental-contract dosar, prefilled with the landlord (company), tenant, contract and property: 'conventie_incetare_inchiriere' (termination agreement), 'declaratie_incetare_contract' (landlord's sworn statement, the C168 termination attachment), 'act_aditional_inchiriere' (addendum: extension and/or new rent; fields act{numar,data}, prelungire{data_inceput,data_sfarsit}, chirie_noua{suma,valuta,de_la}) or 'notificare_incetare_inchiriere' (termination notice: data_incetare, preaviz_zile, motiv). Without render you get the prefilled fields to review with the user; with render:true and the reviewed fields (overrides) you get the PDF (written to outFile when given). Sign it by hand or with agent_sign_pdf, then attach it to the C168 termination.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesRental-contract dosar id
typeYes
fieldsNoOverrides for the prefilled fields (e.g. locatar.adresa, data_incetare, motiv)
renderNo
outFileNo
companyIdNoCompany UUID (overrides STORNO_COMPANY_ID env var)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.0.37

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries behavioral disclosure. It clearly explains the two-phase behavior (preview fields vs rendered PDF), the outFile side effect, the fields-overrides mechanism, and the follow-up signing/attach steps. It does not mention permissions, idempotence, or DB side effects, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 a single dense paragraph, but nearly every sentence adds operational value (document types, field examples, render mode, outFile, signing, attachment). It could be more structured, but it is not redundant or padded.

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?

Given the tool's complexity and lack of output schema, the description covers the main workflow, document variants, required review step, and render/output behavior. It does not describe response shapes or error cases, but the provided context is sufficient for selecting and invoking the tool correctly in the common workflow.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description compensates for a malformed and partially covered schema by explaining each document type's nested fields, the semantics of render, fields, outFile, and companyId. The schema only poorly/partially describes parameters, but the description adds enough meaning for an agent to construct valid calls.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description starts with a specific verb and object ('Generate a legal document from a rental-contract dosar') and enumerates the exact document types and their key fields. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling dosare actions and from agent_sign_pdf by describing the full generation-to-signing workflow.

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?

The description explains when to use the tool: to produce one of four named rental-termination documents, first without render to collect prefilled fields, then with render to obtain the PDF. It mentions signing with agent_sign_pdf and attaching to the C168 termination, giving workflow context, though it does not explicitly list exclusions versus sibling doc-generation tools.

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