Skip to main content
Glama
dennismenken

BuchhaltungsButler MCP-Server

by dennismenken
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

BWA abholen

bb_reports_get_bwa
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a previously created BWA report from BuchhaltungsButler, optionally with files. Provide the ID from the creation run; error codes indicate whether generation is still in progress or no report exists.

Instructions

Holt eine zuvor in BuchhaltungsButler erzeugte Betriebswirtschaftliche Auswertung ab, auf Wunsch samt Dateien. Vorbedingung ist ein Lauf von bb_reports_create_bwa; dessen id_by_customer ist hier einzusetzen. Bei aktivem BB_MCP_READ_ONLY ist dieser erste Schritt gesperrt, dann liefert nur bb_reports_get_ledger eine Auswertung. error_code 8 heißt: Erzeugung läuft noch, einige Sekunden warten. error_code 7 heißt: kein Bericht zu dieser Kennung.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
get_filesNotrue liefert die Dateien base64-kodiert unter csv und pdf mit; ohne Angabe fehlt das Objekt files ganz. bb_reports_create_bwa kennt keinen Parameter, Dateien anzufordern; dass beide deshalb immer null bleiben, ist nicht verifiziert.
response_formatNo'concise' liefert nur die Felder, die einen Datensatz erkennbar machen und den nächsten Schritt erlauben. 'detailed' liefert den Datensatz so, wie die BuchhaltungsButler-API ihn ausgibt. Mit 'concise' beginnen und nur für die wenigen Datensätze auf 'detailed' wechseln, die wirklich geprüft werden müssen. Dieses Feld ist serverseitig und geht nicht an die API.concise
report_id_by_customerYesKennung der zuvor mit bb_reports_create_bwa erzeugten Auswertung, deren id_by_customer. In Suchergebnissen erscheint sie als String; hier ohne Anführungszeichen übergeben. Ohne Bericht dazu antwortet die API mit error_code 7.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsNo
messageNo
successYes
summaryNo
endpointNo
rows_returnedNo
_contract_warningsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.2
    • removedOutput schema / properties / data
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": [
-    "object",
-    "array",
-    "string",
-    "null"
-  ]
-}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / items
      Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": true,
+    "properties": {
+      "amountsSum": {
+        "type": [
+          "number",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "class": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "empty": {
+        "type": [
+          "boolean",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "group": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "level": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "name": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "postingaccount": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "postingaccount_number": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / rows_returned
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / summary
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the prerequisite dependency, the read-only-mode fallback, and the meaning of error codes 7 and 8. It also notes that get_files behavior with bb_reports_create_bwa is unverified, which is honest but slightly speculative.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core action and prerequisite. The error-code explanations and the read-only fallback are useful, though the final sentence about unverified file behavior is slightly speculative and could be trimmed without losing essential guidance.

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?

The description covers the prerequisite, the alternative tool, error handling, and the read-only mode behavior. The output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a tool with three parameters and a clear workflow dependency, this is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds meaning beyond the schema: it explains that report_id_by_customer is the id_by_customer from bb_reports_create_bwa, that it appears as a string in search results but must be passed without quotes, and that error_code 7 corresponds to a missing report. It also clarifies that response_format is server-side and not sent to the API.

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 verb ('Holt ... ab') and resource ('Betriebswirtschaftliche Auswertung'), and explicitly distinguishes it from bb_reports_get_ledger. It also names the prerequisite tool (bb_reports_create_bwa), making the tool's role in the workflow unambiguous.

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?

The description gives explicit when-to-use guidance: it requires a prior bb_reports_create_bwa run, and it names the alternative (bb_reports_get_ledger) for read-only mode. It also explains error_code 7 and 8, which tells the agent how to handle common failure cases.

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