Skip to main content
Glama
stornoro

Storno CLI

by stornoro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

recurring_invoices_create

Create a new recurring invoice template. The system will automatically generate invoices based on the specified frequency and schedule. Supports fixed, updated_product, bnr_rate and bnr_rate_markup pricing rules on line items.

Instructions

Create a new recurring invoice template. The system will automatically generate invoices based on the specified frequency and schedule. Supports fixed, updated_product, bnr_rate and bnr_rate_markup pricing rules on line items.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
linesYesArray of line items (minimum 1 required)
notesNoNotes printed on every generated document. Placeholders: [[luna]], [[luna±N]], [[an]], [[an±N]], [[luna_nr]], [[curs]] (the BNR rate note), [[suma:EXPR]] (an amount computed from EXPR, e.g. [[suma:1900*curs]] = 1,900 EUR at the BNR rate of the issue date; names: curs, curs_EUR, curs_USD…, sold, sold_anterior, rata), and with a running balance: [[sold]] (left after this invoice), [[sold_anterior]] (before), [[rata]] (deducted now). Amounts print in Romanian format (9.633,00).
balanceNoRunning balance in RON (e.g. an investment recovered through rent reductions). Reduced on every issuance by balanceStep; printed with [[sold]]. The template pauses when it reaches zero.
clientIdYesUUID of the client
currencyYesISO 4217 currency code (e.g., RON, EUR)
seriesIdYesUUID of the document series
stopDateNoISO 8601 date to stop generation (YYYY-MM-DD)
companyIdNoCompany UUID (overrides configured default)
frequencyYesHow often to generate invoices
referenceNoHuman-readable reference for this recurring invoice
balanceStepNoExpression deducted from balance per issuance, e.g. "1900*curs" (1,900 EUR at the BNR rate of the issue date). Names: curs, curs_EUR…, sold_anterior. The last deduction is capped at what is left.
dueDateDaysNoDays after issue date for due date (required if dueDateType is days)
dueDateTypeYesHow due date is calculated. days = N days after issue. fixed_day = fixed day of month.
documentTypeYesDocument type to generate
frequencyDayYesDay of month for generation (1-31)
paymentTermsNoPayment terms text
autoEmailTimeNoTime to send email (HH:mm, default: "09:00")
frequencyMonthNoMonth for yearly generation (1-12, required if frequency is yearly)
penaltyEnabledNoEnable late payment penalties (default: false)
dueDateFixedDayNoFixed day of month for due date (1-31, required if dueDateType is fixed_day)
invoiceTypeCodeYesTax regime / invoice type code
autoEmailEnabledNoAuto-send email on invoice generation (default: false)
nextIssuanceDateYesISO 8601 date for the first invoice generation (YYYY-MM-DD)
penaltyGraceDaysNoGrace period in days before penalties apply
autoEmailDayOffsetNoDays offset for email sending (default: 0)
penaltyPercentPerDayNoDaily penalty percentage

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv1.0.51
    • addedInput schema / properties / balance
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "string"
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "Running balance in RON (e.g. an investment recovered through rent reductions). Reduced on every issuance by balanceStep; printed with [[sold]]. The template pauses when it reaches zero."
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / balanceStep
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Expression deducted from balance per issuance, e.g. \"1900*curs\" (1,900 EUR at the BNR rate of the issue date). Names: curs, curs_EUR…, sold_anterior. The last deduction is capped at what is left.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / lines / items / properties / priceExpression
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "With priceRule=expression: the unit price in the document currency computed at issuance, e.g. \"2000*curs - rata\" (2,000 EUR at the BNR rate minus what this issuance deducts from the running balance). Names: curs, curs_EUR…, rata, sold, sold_anterior, luna_nr, an. Negative results become 0.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / lines / items / properties / priceRule / description
      Previous value: -"Pricing rule. fixed: unitPrice as-is. updated_product: refresh from linked product on each issuance. bnr_rate: convert from referenceCurrency at BNR rate. bnr_rate_markup: same as bnr_rate plus markupPercent."New value: +"Pricing rule. fixed: unitPrice as-is. updated_product: refresh from linked product on each issuance. bnr_rate: convert from referenceCurrency at BNR rate. bnr_rate_markup: same as bnr_rate plus markupPercent. expression: unitPrice computed at issuance from priceExpression (document currency), e.g. \"2000*curs - rata\"."
    • changedInput schema / properties / lines / items / properties / priceRule / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "fixed",
-  "updated_product",
-  "bnr_rate",
-  "bnr_rate_markup"
-]New value: +[
+  "fixed",
+  "updated_product",
+  "bnr_rate",
+  "bnr_rate_markup",
+  "expression"
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / notes / description
      Previous value: -"Internal notes"New value: +"Notes printed on every generated document. Placeholders: [[luna]], [[luna±N]], [[an]], [[an±N]], [[luna_nr]], [[curs]] (the BNR rate note), [[suma:EXPR]] (an amount computed from EXPR, e.g. [[suma:1900*curs]] = 1,900 EUR at the BNR rate of the issue date; names: curs, curs_EUR, curs_USD…, sold, sold_anterior, rata), and with a running balance: [[sold]] (left after this invoice), [[sold_anterior]] (before), [[rata]] (deducted now). Amounts print in Romanian format (9.633,00)."
  2. First observedv1.0.17

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the template persists and auto-generates future invoices on the given frequency/schedule. It does not state whether the template starts active, what permissions are required, whether the operation is reversible, or what is returned on success — a notable gap for a mutation tool.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences with the core action first, then the auto-generation behavior, then pricing-rule support. No filler. Slightly undersized relative to the tool's complexity, but well structured.

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?

For a 26-parameter creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is thin. It covers purpose and auto-generation but omits lifecycle facts (active-on-create, idempotency, return shape). The comprehensive schema compensates for most parameter gaps, keeping this at a minimum-viable 3.

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% and the per-parameter docs are unusually rich, so the schema does the heavy lifting and baseline 3 applies. The description adds little beyond the schema and even omits 'expression' from the listed pricing rules, which could mislead an agent into thinking only four rules are supported.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Create a new recurring invoice template') and clarifies that the system auto-generates invoices on a schedule, distinguishing it from a one-off invoice create. However, it never names or contrasts with close siblings like recurring_invoices_update, recurring_invoices_issue_now, or invoices_create, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., client/series must already exist), and no alternatives named. An agent learns the tool creates a template but not why to choose it over invoices_create or recurring_invoices_update. The mention of frequency/schedule is feature context, not usage guidance.

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