InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing
REMOTE · API.INKVOICE.NET
XRechnung and ZUGFeRD e-invoicing (EN 16931): create, validate, check Leitweg-IDs, German VAT.
Available components
Last scanned (9 hours ago)
Scores higher than 94% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Finance and Payments
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically against the live server, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Endpoint Security80
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- No authorisation is required to call this server. Every tool declares its destructiveHint and none is destructive, so open access doesn't expose one. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- The HSTS (Strict-Transport-Security) header is present. View diagnostics → Pass
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability74
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 2356 tokens (~392/item across 6 items; 5 tools + 1 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
Tool Coverage100
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 5 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 7 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 15 Oct 26 0
- Tool “create_xrechnung” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Tool “create_zugferd” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- 10 Oct 26 +1
- Stability: 0.93 → pass security
- 7 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 83 to 93. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 25 days of observed history at the previous scan, 28 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 3 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 77 to 80. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 23 days of observed history at the previous scan, 24 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 28 Sept 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 25 Sept 26 0
- We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
- 22 Sept 26 0
- The server now declares the “prompts” capability functional
- New prompt “check_einvoice” functional
- New prompt “invoice_for_business_buyer” functional
- New prompt “invoice_for_public_buyer” functional
- 20 Sept 26 0
- Judged manipulation: pass → unverified ▼ security
- The server rewrote its instructions, which are the text every model session reads security
- Tool “create_xrechnung” rewrote its description, which is the text the model reads security
- Schema quality: 299 → 384 ▼ functional
- Schema quality: 299 → 350 ▼ functional
- Schema quality: good → unverified ▼ functional
- Schema quality: good → excellent functional
- Server version: 1.0.1 → 1.1.0 functional
- New tool “create_zugferd” functional
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 5 Nov 2026 · Probed https://api.inkvoice.net/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=api.inkvoice.net | CN=GeoTrust TLS RSA CA G1,OU=www.digicert.com,O=DigiCert Inc,C=US | 28 Oct 2026 | 28 Apr 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | 4dc615da2849d2fdf4771aae1a0035e |
| SANs: api.inkvoice.net | ||||||
| CN=GeoTrust TLS RSA CA G1,OU=www.digicert.com,O=DigiCert Inc,C=US (CA) | CN=DigiCert Global Root G2,OU=www.digicert.com,O=DigiCert Inc,C=US | 2 Nov 2017 | 2 Nov 2027 | RSA 2048 | SHA256-RSA | d07782a133fc6f9a57296e131ffd179 |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of api.inkvoice.net. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | trust_anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| net. | present | 37331 | 13 | Verified |
| inkvoice.net. | absent | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication No authorisation required
The endpoint answered without asking for a token. Anyone who knows the URL can reach it.
| Result | No authorisation required |
|---|---|
| HTTP status | 200 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | DENY |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://api.inkvoice.net/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://api.inkvoice.net/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://api.inkvoice.net/mcp |
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
calculate_vat Calculate German VAT ~269
Converts between net, tax and gross for a given VAT rate, in either direction. Give an amount and say whether it is net or gross, and you get all three figures back rounded to the cent. Germany's rates are 19 % (standard) and 7 % (reduced), but any rate from 0 to 100 is accepted, so this also works for an Austrian or French invoice. Rounding is half-away-from-zero, the convention invoices and tax authorities use, and the three returned figures always reconcile: net plus tax equals gross exactly, with no cent left over from rounding each separately. What this does NOT do: it does not decide which rate applies to a supply, handle more than one rate at a time, or know anything about reverse charge, intra-community supply or the Kleinunternehmer rules. It is arithmetic, not tax advice.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| amount | number | yes | The amount to convert, in the invoice currency. Must not be negative. |
| basis | string | yes | Whether `amount` is the net figure (add tax to it) or the gross figure (take tax out of it). |
| rate | number | yes | VAT rate as a percentage, not a fraction: 19 means 19 %, not 1900 %. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
check_leitweg_id Check a Leitweg-ID ~342
Checks a German Leitweg-ID — the routing identifier that goes in BT-10 of an XRechnung to a public authority. An invoice to a German public body with a wrong or missing Leitweg-ID is rejected, so this is worth checking before building a document. It verifies the structure (Grobadressierung of 2 to 12 digits, an optional Feinadressierung of up to 30 alphanumerics, then two check digits) and recomputes the ISO/IEC 7064 MOD 97-10 check digit, the same procedure an IBAN uses. When the check digits are wrong it returns the ones the address parts actually imply, so the value can be corrected rather than merely rejected. It also names the Bundesland the leading two digits point at, or Bund for the federation. One real limit: the check digit is computed over the address parts with the hyphens removed, which is what KoSIT specifies, so it CANNOT detect a hyphen in the wrong place. '04011000-1234512345-06' and '040110001-234512345-06' both pass. That is the specification's behaviour, not a defect here. What this does NOT do: it does not confirm that the ID belongs to a real authority or that they are reachable. It checks the number, not the recipient — there is no directory lookup.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| leitwegId | string | yes | The Leitweg-ID, e.g. '04011000-1234512345-06'. Surrounding whitespace is ignored. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
create_xrechnung Create an XRechnung ~444
Builds a German XRechnung 3.x electronic invoice (EN 16931, CII syntax) from invoice details and returns the XML as text. This is the format German public-sector buyers are legally required to receive, and that many private B2B buyers now ask for. The EN 16931 business rules are checked before anything is built, and a rejected call comes back naming the rules that failed and the business term (BT-xx) each concerns. The ones worth getting right up front: tax category S requires a rate above 0 %, categories Z, E and AE require exactly 0 %, E and AE additionally require a stated exemption reason (BT-120), both parties need an email address because XRechnung makes the electronic address (BT-34, BT-49) mandatory, and an IBAN (BT-84) is required, because XRechnung makes payment instructions (BG-16) mandatory (BR-DE-1). For a public-sector buyer, put their Leitweg-ID in buyerReference (BT-10) — check_leitweg_id will verify it first. What this does NOT do: - It does not validate against the KoSIT Prüftool. It applies our reading of EN 16931, which is not the same thing as the Schematron suite a receiving portal runs. Use validate_einvoice for a second look, and the official validator before a deadline. - It does not produce ZUGFeRD or Factur-X. There is no PDF and no embedded XML — this is a bare XML file. Use create_zugferd for the hybrid a private-sector B2B buyer usually wants. - It handles ONE tax rate and one tax category for the whole invoice. A document mixing 19 % and 7 % lines is not expressible here. - It does not send the invoice anywhere, and there is no Peppol. Nothing is stored: no account, no invoice record, no retained personal data.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| invoice | object | yes | The invoice to turn into an XRechnung document. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
create_zugferd Create a ZUGFeRD / Factur-X invoice ~431
Builds a ZUGFeRD 2.x / Factur-X hybrid invoice from the same details create_xrechnung takes, and returns it as a PDF file. A hybrid is one invoice stated twice in one file: a PDF/A-3 document a person reads, carrying the same invoice inside it as EN 16931 XML a machine books. This is the format private-sector German B2B buyers generally want, where XRechnung is what public bodies require. If the recipient is a public authority and gave you a Leitweg-ID, you want create_xrechnung instead. The embedded XML declares plain EN 16931 — the profile ZUGFeRD calls COMFORT — not the XRechnung CIUS, because that CIUS is a statement about public-sector procurement. Validation is identical to create_xrechnung, except that the IBAN is optional here (EN 16931 makes BG-16 optional): the same EN 16931 rules are applied before anything is built, and a rejected call names the rules and business terms that failed. What this does NOT do: - The result is a binary PDF returned as an attachment. It is not text and there is nothing useful to read in it — do not try to quote or summarise its contents. Offer it to the user as a file. - It does not validate against veraPDF or the Mustangproject validator. The document is built to be valid PDF/A-3 with the required Factur-X metadata, but that is our reading rather than a validator's verdict. - It handles ONE tax rate and one tax category for the whole invoice, exactly as create_xrechnung does. - It does not send the invoice anywhere, and there is no Peppol. - There is no logo and no custom styling. The PDF uses the default invoice layout. Nothing is stored: no account, no invoice record, no retained personal data.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| invoice | object | yes | The invoice to turn into a ZUGFeRD / Factur-X document. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
validate_einvoice Check an e-invoice ~363
Reads an existing electronic invoice and reports what is wrong with it. Accepts XRechnung and ZUGFeRD XML in either EN 16931 syntax — CII (used by XRechnung and ZUGFeRD) and UBL — and reports the syntax and profile it found along with the invoice's key fields, so it also answers "what is this file?". It checks the rules behind most real rejections: BT-10 buyer reference present, and its Leitweg-ID check digit when it looks like one; BT-34 and BT-49 electronic addresses present; tax category S not used at 0 %; BT-120 exemption reason present for categories E and AE; line amounts summing to BT-106; net plus tax equalling the BT-112 gross; BT-115 amount due matching gross less prepaid; and the due date not falling before the issue date. What this does NOT do: - It is NOT the KoSIT Prüftool and is not a substitute for it. It covers the rules that account for most rejections, not the full EN 16931 Schematron suite. A file that passes here can still be rejected by a Rechnungseingangsportal. - It does not check the XSD schema, so a structurally invalid document may parse here. - It reads XML only. A ZUGFeRD PDF must have its embedded XML extracted first — pass the XML, not the PDF. Nothing is stored: the document is parsed in memory and discarded.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| xml | string | yes | The full XML text of the invoice. For ZUGFeRD, the XML extracted from the PDF, not the PDF itself. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing MCP server?
InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing is a hosted endpoint at https://api.inkvoice.net/mcp, so there is nothing to install locally. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
remote · api.inkvoice.net
claude mcp add --transport http net-inkvoice-inkvoice 'https://api.inkvoice.net/mcp'
What is the InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing MCP server?
InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as net.inkvoice/inkvoice. XRechnung and ZUGFeRD e-invoicing (EN 16931): create, validate, check Leitweg-IDs, German VAT. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://api.inkvoice.net/mcp).
Is the InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing MCP server safe to use?
InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing scores 87 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing MCP server expose?
InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing exposes 5 tools: create_zugferd, calculate_vat, create_xrechnung, check_leitweg_id, validate_einvoice. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 1,849 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing MCP server still maintained?
InkVoice — XRechnung & E-Invoicing is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 5 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.