Fibalo

Kontakte: Create Kontakt

create_kontakt

Idempotent

Add a customer (debitor) or supplier (kreditor). Fibalo assigns the DATEV account number.

An invoice can only be written to a debitor, so this comes first for a new customer. Search list_kontakte before creating: Fibalo refuses a likely duplicate (same VAT id, or same name and postal code) and returns the existing Kontakt instead. A VAT id is checked with the EU's VIES service. An invoice needs the customer's full postal address, so ask for it.

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": {
      "company": "<company>",
      "typ": "<typ>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_kontakt"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`typ`	Yes	debitor (customer) or kreditor (supplier). Cannot be changed later.
`land`	No	2-letter ISO country code, DE for Germany.
`name`	Yes	legal name as it must appear on the invoice.
`email`	No	where invoices are sent.
`company`	Yes	company name or id.
`beleg_id`	No	link the new Kontakt to this Beleg: a supplier Beleg takes a kreditor, an outgoing invoice a debitor.
`ust_idnr`	No	VAT id, e.g. DE123456789. Its checksum is verified.
`address_city`	No	city.
`address_street`	No	street and house number.
`address_postal_code`	No	postal code.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 4, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / beleg_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "link the new Kontakt to this Beleg: a supplier Beleg takes a kreditor, an\noutgoing invoice a debitor."
+}

First observedNov 2, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses the duplicate-detection rule (same VAT id, or same name and postal code), that the existing Kontakt is returned rather than an error, that a VAT id is checked against the EU VIES service, and that the DATEV account number is system-assigned. These are behavioral facts an agent cannot infer from any structured field.

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?

Five short sentences with no padding; the core action and the DATEV numbering note come first, followed by prerequisites. Slightly longer than strictly necessary for a 10-parameter tool, but every sentence carries operational information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. For a mutation tool with 10 parameters, the description covers creation semantics, dedupe behavior, external validation, and preconditions — nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds meaning by framing the address fields as required in practice for invoice issuance, and by tying the VAT id to a VIES check, which goes beyond the schema's "checksum is verified".

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?

"Add a customer (debitor) or supplier (kreditor)" names a specific verb and resource, and adds that Fibalo assigns the DATEV account number. The sibling set contains list_kontakte, get_kontakt and update_kontakt, and this wording makes it unambiguous that this tool is the create path.

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?

It gives an explicit precondition ("Search list_kontakte before creating"), a sequencing rule (a debitor comes first for a new customer because an invoice can only be written to a debitor), and an instruction to collect the full postal address. It names the alternative sibling and the condition that selects it.

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

All Fibalo 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?