Skip to main content
Glama

quaderno

by io.usefulapi

Create a product (item)

create_item
Destructive

MUTATES Quaderno data — create a product/item in the catalog. Provide name + unit_cost; use fields for any other attribute (code, description, tax_class, tax_type, currency, country, stock). Quaderno API: POST /items. Returns the created item.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoSKU / product code.
kindNoWhether it is a one-off or a subscription product.
nameYesProduct name.
fieldsNoAdditional raw Quaderno fields merged into the request body (escape hatch for any field not typed above).
currencyNoISO 4217 currency code.
unit_costYesUnit price of the product.
product_typeNoWhether the product is a good or a service.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description explicitly says 'MUTATES Quaderno data,' which reinforces the state-changing nature, and adds useful behavior details: the HTTP method/resource is POST /items and the tool returns the created item. This is valuable context that annotations alone do not provide.

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?

Three compact sentences with no filler. The mutation warning is front-loaded, followed by required parameters, the escape-hatch guidance, the endpoint, and the return value. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a 7-parameter tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers the essential calling information: required fields, the fields escape hatch, the API endpoint, and the return value. It is slightly lean on what the returned item contains, but that is not necessary to invoke the tool correctly given the schema covers parameters.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that `fields` is the mechanism for any attribute not explicitly typed (code, description, tax_class, tax_type, currency, country, stock) and by emphasizing the required parameters name + unit_cost. This goes beyond the schema's property 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 states a specific action and resource: 'create a product/item in the catalog' and explicitly names the API endpoint (POST /items). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling create tools like create_contact and create_invoice.

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?

The description gives concrete usage guidance: 'Provide name + unit_cost; use `fields` for any other attribute.' It also clarifies that extra attributes go through the fields escape hatch. It does not explicitly discuss when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough for a create action.

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

All quaderno toolsInspect
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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

Most tools target distinct resources and actions, but create_invoice and create_transaction both generate tax-compliant sale documents, making their boundary unclear. calculate_tax also overlaps conceptually with the tax calculation embedded in create_transaction, though the descriptions help separate the read-only case.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set follows a consistent verb_noun pattern across get_, list_, create_, and update_ tools, with clear singular/plural usage. calculate_tax and ping fit the style, but quaderno_request is a generic escape hatch that breaks the predictable naming convention.

Tool Count3/5

At 23 tools, the server is on the heavy side and falls in the 16-25 range that feels less scoped than ideal. However, the count is somewhat justified by the many distinct entity types covered, including contacts, invoices, items, credit notes, expenses, receipts, jurisdictions, and webhooks.

Completeness3/5

Core workflows like calculating tax, creating invoices/transactions, and managing contacts/items are covered, and every exposed resource has get/list access. Missing update/delete operations for most resources, read-only webhooks, and no direct creation paths for expenses/receipts/credit notes leave notable lifecycle gaps.

Resources