fynsight: MCP server for DATEV

start-month-run

Start the Monatsreporting run (month-end close) for a month. It only starts when that month has NO run yet (any status except failed/superseded counts, including signed-off months): otherwise nothing is written and the existing run is returned with already_exists true, its status and a deeplink, so calling it twice is safe. It NEVER replaces a run — restarting happens only in the app, with confirmation. The month must have booking data, otherwise NO_DATA_FOR_PERIOD is returned and no run is created. Starting normalizes the figures, collects anomaly cases and checks due watch items against them (no approval). Nothing runs in the background afterwards: AI reviews and comment drafts are created only when a person asks for them in the app. Ask the user before starting. Next steps: get-month-run-status, list-open-anomaly-cases.

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": {
      "period": "<period>"
    },
    "name": "start-month-run"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`period`	Yes	Month, YYYY-MM

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations it discloses concrete behavior: nothing is written on a duplicate, the existing run plus already_exists/status/deeplink are returned, restarting is app-only with confirmation, and NO_DATA_FOR_PERIOD is raised when the month has no bookings. It also rules out background AI reviews or comment drafts. The one soft spot is a tension with idempotentHint=false, since "calling it twice is safe" reads like an idempotency guarantee; that is best read as repeat-safety (the response payload differs on the second call) rather than a flat contradiction, so it does not negate the otherwise rich disclosure.

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 purpose and the no-replace guarantee are front-loaded, then duplicate handling, error condition, side-effect scope, and next steps follow in a logical order. Every sentence carries an operational fact (uniqueness rule, no-restart rule, no-background-work rule); nothing is filler.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by describing both the success-shape signals (already_exists, status, deeplink) and the failure code. For a one-parameter mutation with a human-confirmation requirement, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly and to explain the outcome.

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% and the schema already defines the single period parameter as YYYY-MM, so the baseline is 3. The description earns a point above baseline by adding a validity prerequisite the schema lacks: the month must contain booking data or the call fails with NO_DATA_FOR_PERIOD and creates nothing.

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?

"Start the Monatsreporting run (month-end close) for a month" gives a specific verb plus resource plus scope, and the closing "Next steps" line separates it from get-month-run-status (read status) and list-open-anomaly-cases. An agent can distinguish it from all 28 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 Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states the precondition (month must have no existing run of any status), the alternative outcome when that fails, and the explicit instruction "Ask the user before starting." It also names the follow-up tools, so both when-to-call and what-to-do-next are covered.

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

All fynsight: MCP server for DATEV 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?