Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kingdee MCP Server

Kingdee MCP Server

by WaHaiLong
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

kingdee_submit_production_orders

Submit production orders to the approval queue. Specify form type and document IDs to trigger submission and receive status.

Instructions

提交生产订单（PRD_MO）至审核队列。

Returns: str: JSON，含 success / next_action / bill_ids

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": {
      "params": "<params>"
    },
    "name": "kingdee_submit_production_orders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations show no safety hints (all false), so description must cover behavior. It only mentions submitting to an approval queue, omitting idempotency, error states, or consequences of re-submission.

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?

Very concise with no fluff, but return type structure could be clearer. Front-loads key action but loses some detail.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Simple tool but description lacks explanation of return fields (e.g., next_action meaning), error handling, or workflow implications. Output schema not provided inline.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Tool description provides no parameter explanations; schema descriptions are in Chinese, making them inaccessible to an English-speaking LLM. High schema coverage (100%) but descriptions are non-English.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the action (submit) and resource (production orders, PRD_MO) to an approval queue. It distinguishes from general submission tools like kingdee_submit_bills by name and context.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use versus alternatives like kingdee_save_production_order or kingdee_audit_production_orders. Agent must infer from name alone.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools