clover-mcp

create_order

Create a new open order in Clover POS with no line items or payment. Preview using dry_run, then confirm to apply the changes.

Instructions

Modifies merchant data. Create a new open order (no line items, no payment).

Previews on dry_run; confirms via MCP elicitation or confirm=True before writing. Add items with add_line_item. Requires ORDERS_W.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "create_order"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`note`	No
`confirm`	No
`dry_run`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.7.0Aug 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Discloses important behavior beyond annotations: it requires confirmation before writing (dry_run previews, confirm=True or MCP elicitation needed), it modifies merchant data, and it requires ORDERS_W permission. This adds significant context on side effects and authorization.

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 description is concise, with each sentence contributing essential info: purpose, scope, safety behavior, follow-up tool, and permission. It's front-loaded with the primary purpose and uses clear formatting.

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?

Despite having only 3 parameters and no required ones, the description covers the tool's purpose, creation scope, dry-run/confirm behavior, related tool, and permission requirement. The output schema exists, so return values don't need to be explained. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

The description explains dry_run and confirm parameters (preview vs. write with confirmation), but the 'note' parameter is not described at all. Given the schema has 0% coverage, the description partially compensates but leaves one parameter ambiguous.

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 clearly states 'Create a new open order' with the specific scope of no line items and no payment, distinguishing it from siblings like add_line_item. The verb+resource is explicit and unambiguous.

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 clear guidance on how to use the tool: dry_run for preview, confirm via MCP elicitation or confirm=True, and explicitly directs users to add_line_item for adding items. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the context strongly implies this is only for creating bare orders.

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

Deploy Server