Skip to main content
Glama
stornoro

Storno CLI

by stornoro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

recurring_invoices_update

Update an existing recurring invoice template. All fields are optional but at least one must be provided. When updating lines, the entire lines array replaces existing lines.

Instructions

Update an existing recurring invoice template. All fields are optional but at least one must be provided. When updating lines, the entire lines array replaces existing lines.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uuidYesUUID of the recurring invoice template to update
linesNoArray of line items (replaces all existing lines)
notesNoNotes printed on every generated document; same placeholders as recurring_invoices_create ([[luna]], [[an]], [[curs]], [[suma:EXPR]], [[sold]], [[sold_anterior]], [[rata]])
balanceNoRunning balance in RON (null removes it); see recurring_invoices_create
clientIdNoUUID of the client
currencyNoISO 4217 currency code
seriesIdNoUUID of the document series
stopDateNoISO 8601 date to stop generation (null to remove)
companyIdNoCompany UUID (overrides configured default)
frequencyNoHow often to generate invoices
referenceNoHuman-readable reference
balanceStepNoExpression deducted from balance per issuance, e.g. "1900*curs"; null removes it
dueDateDaysNoDays after issue date for due date
dueDateTypeNoHow due date is calculated. days = N days after issue. fixed_day = fixed day of month.
documentTypeNoDocument type to generate
frequencyDayNoDay of month for generation (1-31)
paymentTermsNoPayment terms text
autoEmailTimeNoTime to send email (HH:mm)
frequencyMonthNoMonth for yearly generation (1-12)
penaltyEnabledNoEnable late payment penalties
dueDateFixedDayNoFixed day of month for due date (1-31)
invoiceTypeCodeNoTax regime / invoice type code
autoEmailEnabledNoAuto-send email on invoice generation
nextIssuanceDateNoISO 8601 date for next invoice generation (YYYY-MM-DD)
penaltyGraceDaysNoGrace period in days before penalties apply
autoEmailDayOffsetNoDays offset for email sending
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 (null removes it); see recurring_invoices_create"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / balanceStep
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Expression deducted from balance per issuance, e.g. \"1900*curs\"; null removes it",
+  "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; same placeholders as recurring_invoices_create ([[luna]], [[an]], [[curs]], [[suma:EXPR]], [[sold]], [[sold_anterior]], [[rata]])"
  2. First observedv1.0.17

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
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 does disclose one genuinely important trait — that the lines array replaces all existing lines (destructive to prior lines) — plus the at-least-one-field constraint. But it omits permissions, reversibility of scalar fields, and the effect on already-scheduled issuances.

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 short sentences with zero filler, and the update-scope is front-loaded ahead of the constraints. Efficient, though the lines-replacement warning could be surfaced more prominently given its destructive effect.

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?

A 27-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema is a demanding case. The rich schema compensates for parameter documentation, but the description should still note authentication/permission needs and whether a partial update is safe for scheduled generation. Adequate, not complete.

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 the schema already documents all 27 parameters in depth, including enums and placeholder syntax. The description adds only the replacement semantics for lines, which is the schema's own note ('replaces all existing lines') restated. 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Update an existing recurring invoice template'), clearly distinguishing it from recurring_invoices_create and recurring_invoices_get. However, it never references the sibling tools by name to sharpen the boundary.

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?

Gives one useful precondition ('all fields are optional but at least one must be provided') and the lines-replacement rule, which implies usage context. But it never says when to prefer this over recurring_invoices_create or toggle, nor what happens if no fields are supplied.

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