Lexware Office MCP by usefulapi

Create a draft quotation

lexware_create_draft_quotation

Destructive

WRITE: creates a quotation (Angebot) in Lexware Office as a DRAFT (never finalized or sent). Address it to an existing customer (contact_id) or a one-time address (name + country_code). Prices are EUR. Returns the new id and lexwareAppUrl to review and finalize it in Lexware Office. POST /v1/quotations (without finalize).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`zip`	No	One-time address ZIP code.
`city`	No	One-time address city.
`name`	No	One-time recipient name (no contact is created). Required without contact_id.
`title`	No	Document title (max 25 characters; default from Lexware).
`remark`	No	Closing remark (max 2000).
`street`	No	One-time address street and number.
`language`	No	Document language (default de; en needs the INVOICING_PRO feature).
`tax_type`	No	Tax type (default net): net, gross, vatfree, intraCommunitySupply, constructionService13b, externalService13b, thirdPartyCountryService, thirdPartyCountryDelivery.
`contact_id`	No	An existing Lexware contact with the customer role (from lexware_list_contacts). Give this OR name + country_code.
`line_items`	Yes	1-300 line items.
`supplement`	No	One-time address supplement.
`country_code`	No	ISO 3166 alpha-2 country code, e.g. DE, AT, CH (lexware_list_countries lists the supported codes).
`introduction`	No	Introduction text (max 2000).
`voucher_date`	Yes	Quotation date (yyyy-mm-dd).
`tax_type_note`	No	Note for a vat-free tax type (Lexware uses the organization's default when omitted).
`expiration_date`	Yes	Valid until (yyyy-mm-dd), on or after voucher_date.
`payment_term_label`	No	Payment terms text shown on the document.
`payment_term_duration`	No	Days until payment is due (the organization's or contact's default when omitted).
`total_discount_percentage`	No	Total discount in percent.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the write nature is covered; the description adds genuinely new behavior — the result is always a DRAFT that is never finalized or sent, plus the POST /v1/quotations (without finalize) shape. It still omits failure modes and duplicate-creation/idempotency behavior, so not a 5.

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?

A single compact block, front-loaded with the 'WRITE' marker and the DRAFT constraint, with no filler sentences. Every clause carries operational information.

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?

With 19 parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description usefully fills the return-value gap by naming the returned id and lexwareAppUrl, and it clarifies the draft lifecycle. It leaves out permission/scope requirements and error behavior, so it is slightly short of fully complete.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented (contact_id vs name+country_code, EUR pricing, tax_type semantics). The description only restates the address either/or and the EUR currency, adding little 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?

States a precise verb and resource ('creates a quotation (Angebot) in Lexware Office as a DRAFT') and immediately scopes it away from the finalized/sent variant. An agent can distinguish it from lexware_create_draft_invoice and lexware_get_quotation without opening any 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?

Clear context: use it when you want an unfinalized quotation addressed either to an existing contact_id or to a one-time address (name + country_code), and it points the agent to Lexware Office for finalization. It does not explicitly state when to prefer this over the sibling draft-invoice tool or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All Lexware Office MCP by usefulapi 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.

Create a draft quotation

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

Resources