Kash.click

Record an order

order_create

Record a new order in the connected shop. Input includes paymentMode, and items[]. Each item can be of type 'catalog' (with productId), 'department' (with price and deptId) or 'free' (with title and price). Check if the client already exists using data_list_clients and if the client exists, only specify idClient. If provided, paymentMode should correspond to a payment ID from data_list_payments_modes tool. Returns a sale confirmation JSON including: a link to the PDF invoice, and a link to a private order page showing full order details which can also be used by the client to pay online. IMPORTANT: before creating a validated invoice (payment ≠ -2), call account_show_infos to verify that shopName, adressline1, and companyRegistrationNum are all set. If any of these fields are empty, warn the user and suggest using account_edit to fill them in before issuing invoices.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	Yes	List of sale items (at least one required)
`client`	No	Inline customer details (used when no existing idClient)
`idUser`	No	Staff member ID to assign the sale to
`idtable`	No	Table ID for table-service orders
`payment`	No	Payment method ID; omit to leave as unpaid quote
`idClient`	No	Existing customer ID (alternative to inline client object)
`idcaisse`	No	Cash register ID
`pagerNum`	No	Pager/buzzer number for the customer
`numcouverts`	No	Number of covers/guests
`publicComment`	No	Comment visible on the receipt
`deliveryMethod`	No	Delivery method: 0=takeaway, 1=delivery, 2=on-site, 3=drive, 4=relay, 5=table service, 6=room service
`privateComment`	No	Internal staff-only comment

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations indicate non-idempotent and non-destructive, but the description adds rich behavioral context: it details item types (catalog, dept, free) with required subfields, explains the significance of payment value -2 for unpaid quotes, and mandates a prerequisite check on account info. It also describes the return JSON structure, including invoice and order page links.

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, starting with the core purpose, then item types, client handling, payment, output, and an important note. It is concise enough given the complexity, though it could be slightly more streamlined.

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 12 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description thoroughly covers usage: item type variants, client identification options, payment constraints, return value details, and critical preconditions. It also references related tools (data_list_clients, account_show_infos) for complete workflow context.

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%, providing full parameter descriptions. The description adds high-level semantics by grouping item types, explaining when to use idClient vs inline client, and linking paymentMode to a separate tool. This enhances understanding beyond the schema's individual field 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 explicitly states 'Record a new order in the connected shop', clearly identifying the action (create) and resource (order). It also outlines key inputs like items and paymentMode, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides specific preconditions: check existing clients via data_list_clients, validate payment mode against data_list_payments_modes, and verify account fields before creating a validated invoice. It also advises using account_edit if prerequisites are missing, offering clear contextual guidance.

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

All Kash.click 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

A3.7/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct entity or action (account, client, order, product, payment, VAT, etc.), with clear naming like 'account_create' vs 'account_edit' and 'data_list_' prefixed listings. No overlapping purposes detected.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names use snake_case and follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., account_create, client_add, data_list_clients). Even compound names like auth_login_with_otp adhere to this structure.

Tool Count4/5

41 tools is high but justified by the wide scope of a POS/accounting system (accounts, clients, orders, products, payments, VAT, reports). Slightly above the typical range but well-scoped.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers CRUD for all major entities (clients, departments, products, VAT, payment modes, orders), plus queries, reports, and authentication. No obvious gaps for a small business management server.

Resources

Need Help?