Skip to main content
Glama

Filter Talonic Documents

talonic_filter
Read-only

Filter documents by extracted field values using conditions like 'total > 1000'. Supports numeric, date, text comparisons and presence checks.

Instructions

Find documents by their extracted field VALUES using composable conditions (e.g. 'invoices where total > 1000').

USE WHEN: value-based criteria on extracted fields — numeric/date/text comparisons or presence checks. NOT FOR: free-text / concept search (use talonic_search) · a single document by id (use talonic_get_document). ARGS: conditions[] (AND-ed). Each = EXACTLY ONE of field (canonical name) or field_id (UUID), an operator, and usually a value. Operators: eq, neq, gt, gte, lt, lte, between (needs value AND value_to), contains, is_empty / is_not_empty (no value). value/value_to are string|number|boolean matching the field type (ISO YYYY-MM-DD for dates). TEXT FILTERS: for eq/contains/is_not_empty on a text field, just TRY a natural field name ('currency', 'vendor_name') — names resolve server-side and an unresolved field surfaces in warnings[] rather than erroring. Do NOT block on discovering the field first; search-first is only required for numeric operators. NUMERIC GUARD: gt/gte/lt/lte/between only work when the field's dataType is 'number'. Call talonic_search first and check dataType; a numeric op on a string field returns zero matches. If the response has warnings[], surface them to the user — do not silently retry. RETURNS: data[] (matching documents with field values), total, warnings[].

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
conditionsYesOne or more filter conditions, AND-ed together.
searchNoOptional free-text search applied alongside the filters.
sortNoOptional sort by a field.
pageNoPage number for pagination.
limitNoResults per page. Default 50 server-side.
source_connection_idNoOptionally scope to a specific source connection.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesDocuments matching the filter conditions, with their extracted field values.
totalNoTotal documents matching across all pages.
pageNoCurrent page number.
paginationNoCursor-based pagination metadata.
warningsNoAPI warnings surfaced by the Talonic filter endpoint. Most commonly raised when a numeric operator is applied to a string-typed field, in which case the warning explains the lexicographic-comparison trap and suggests a schema-design change. Agents should surface these to the user rather than silently retrying.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations give readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. Description adds: conditions are AND-ed, operator-specific behaviors (is_empty takes no value), numeric guard (check dataType first), text field name resolution with warnings, and instruction to surface warnings. No contradiction.

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 well-structured with clear sections (USE WHEN, NOT FOR, ARGS, TEXT FILTERS, NUMERIC GUARD, RETURNS) and front-loaded. It's somewhat long but each sentence adds value, appropriate for the complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (6 params, nested objects, many operators) and existence of output schema, the description covers all critical aspects: purpose, usage, parameter details, edge cases, warnings, return structure. Nothing missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds deep semantics: explains field/field_id exclusivity, operator list, value/value_to for between, data types, and text filter resolution. This goes well beyond schema descriptions.

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 clearly states 'Find documents by their extracted field VALUES using composable conditions' and gives an example. It distinguishes from siblings talonic_search and talonic_get_document in the 'NOT FOR' section.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says 'USE WHEN: value-based criteria on extracted fields' and 'NOT FOR: free-text / concept search (use talonic_search); a single document by id (use talonic_get_document).' Also provides guidance on numeric guard and warning handling.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/talonicdev/talonic-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server