Conecto

Draft a purchase order

purchasing_create_order

Draft an order to a supplier: lines with an optional Inventory sku (received stock then comes into Inventory at the line's unit cost), a description, quantity, unit cost and tax rate; the currency (default the supplier's), the expected delivery date and the stock location deliveries go to (default Main). A draft changes freely (purchasing_update_order) until it is sent; it has no number yet. Costs $0.01 per call; nothing if it fails.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "supplier": "<supplier>",
      "lines": "<lines>"
    },
    "name": "purchasing_create_order"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lines`	Yes
`notes`	No	Printed above the lines, e.g. delivery instructions.
`currency`	No	ISO 4217, e.g. "EUR". Default: the supplier's.
`location`	No	An Inventory location for received stock. Default: Main.
`supplier`	Yes	A supplier_id, or the supplier's name.
`expected_on`	No	When delivery is expected, YYYY-MM-DD.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare the mutation profile; the description adds genuinely new behavior: drafts have no number yet, changes are free until sending, and the $0.01 per call cost with no charge on failure. It also explains the Inventory side effect of supplying a SKU (stock received at the line's unit cost), which the annotations cannot convey.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, and the lifecycle and pricing notes follow compactly. The middle list of line fields is dense but each element earns its place; nothing is redundant with sibling names repeated needlessly.

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?

With no output schema and a moderate six-parameter surface, the description covers what is created, what defaults apply, what happens to inventory, how the draft evolves, and what it costs. An agent has enough to call it correctly without guessing.

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 83%, so the schema already documents defaults for currency, location, quantity and tax rate. The description largely restates those same defaults and field roles rather than adding format or validation detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Draft an order to a supplier') and enumerates the payload (lines, currency, delivery date, location). It also distinguishes this tool from purchasing_update_order and the implicit send step, so an agent can tell it apart from siblings without opening a schema.

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?

It explicitly routes the agent to purchasing_update_order for modifications and states drafts are mutable 'until it is sent', which frames the lifecycle. There is no explicit when-not guidance against purchasing_send_order or purchasing_draft_reorders, so context is clear but not exhaustive.

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

All Conecto tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?