Meistron

Angebot anlegen

angebot_anlegen

Legt einen ANGEBOTS-Entwurf an. Ein Angebot ist noch keine Rechnung: Es fordert kein Geld und wird nicht gebucht. Verschickt NICHTS an den Kunden.

Wird ein Auftrag angegeben, übernimmt das Angebot dessen Material und erfasste Arbeitszeit als Positionen. Zusätzlich oder stattdessen können eigene Positionen angegeben werden.

Die Umwandlung eines Angebots in eine Rechnung geschieht in Meistron und ist über diesen Zugang NICHT möglich.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`hinweis`	No	Text für den Kunden auf dem Angebot.
`kunde_id`	No	Die Kennung des Kunden. Ohne Angabe wird der Kunde des Auftrags übernommen.
`auftrag_id`	No	Auftrag, dessen Material und Arbeitszeit übernommen werden sollen.
`positionen`	No	Eigene Positionen. Höchstens 50.
`steuersatz`	No	Steuersatz für den GESAMTEN Beleg in Prozent — 19, 7 oder 0. Ohne Angabe der im Betrieb hinterlegte Satz. Ein Beleg trägt genau EINEN Satz, im Kopf wie in jeder Position; gemischte Sätze lehnt Meistron beim Finalisieren ab. Wer beides braucht, legt zwei Belege an.
`ohne_zeiten`	No	Nur Material übernehmen, keine Stunden.
`ohne_material`	No	Nur Stunden übernehmen, kein Material.
`idempotency_key`	No	Im vollautonomen Betrieb erforderlich. Beim ersten Aufruf weglassen: Der Server liefert dann einen UUID-Key, ohne die Aktion auszuführen. Den Aufruf mit diesem Key wiederholen und bei Retry/Reconnect denselben Key verwenden. Eine neue beabsichtigte Aktion braucht einen neuen Key.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses key behavioral side effects: it creates only a draft, does not charge or book anything, sends no customer communication, and cannot convert to an invoice. These are exactly the side effects an agent must know and are not visible in the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact, front-loaded with the core identity, and every sentence carries information: draft status, no payment, no sending, data sources for line items, and the conversion limitation. There is no redundant or filler content.

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?

For an 8-parameter creation tool, the description covers the main behavior, exclusions, and parameter relationships, and the schema carries full parameter detail. The main gap is the absent output contract: with no output schema, the description does not say what the agent receives after creating the draft, such as an Angebots-ID.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds one meaningful layer beyond the schema by explaining how auftrag_id and positionen interact: an order's material and recorded work hours are taken over as line items, and own positions can be added 'Zusätzlich oder stattdessen'. This combination rule is not fully stated in individual parameter 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 opens with 'Legt einen ANGEBOTS-Entwurf an', identifying a specific verb and resource, and immediately distinguishes it from an invoice: 'Ein Angebot ist noch keine Rechnung'. It also states the tool does not send anything to the customer, which separates it from invoice/sending tools.

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 makes the when-not clear by stating it does not request money, is not booked, sends nothing, and that conversion to an invoice is not possible via this access. However, it does not explicitly name sibling tools such as rechnung_anlegen or rechnung_versenden as alternatives, so the routing is implicit rather than fully explicit.

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

All Meistron tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool name clearly identifies a distinct resource (Angebot, Auftrag, Rechnung, Material, etc.) and action. Even potentially similar pairs like material_buchen and material_zuweisen are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions, so an agent can reliably select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent resource_action pattern in lowercase with underscores (e.g., kunde_anlegen, material_suchen). A few status/query tools like betrieb_ueberblick and datei_stand use noun compounds, but these are consistently used for state queries and do not break the overall convention.

Tool Count3/5

With 23 tools, the server falls into the 'heavy' range of 16-25. While the breadth of a handwerker management system justifies many operations, the count is high and some areas (like customer management) are underrepresented, making the set feel larger than necessary.

Completeness3/5

The core order-to-invoice workflow is well covered, but there are notable gaps: no customer search or update, no conversion from Angebot to Rechnung, and no ability to change order status. These are significant omissions that agents must work around, even though the descriptions clearly state these limitations.

Resources

Need Help?