Skip to main content
Glama
iseppo

e-arveldaja MCP Server

by iseppo
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Book Owner-Paid Expense

create_owner_expense_reimbursement

Create a journal entry to reimburse an owner for business expenses they paid personally, recording net amount, VAT, and expense account.

Instructions

Create a journal for a business expense paid personally by the owner.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vat_rateYesVAT rate as decimal (e.g. 0.24 for 24%; 0 = no VAT/non-deductible). Must be a fraction, NOT a percentage — use 0.24, not 24.
net_amountYesNet amount (without VAT)
vat_amountNoExact VAT amount (overrides vat_rate if provided)
descriptionYesExpense description
vat_accountNoInput VAT account (default 1510)
effective_dateYesExpense date (YYYY-MM-DD)
document_numberNoReceipt/document number
expense_accountYesExpense account number (e.g. 5000, 6000)
owner_client_idYesOwner/shareholder client ID
payable_accountNoPayable to owner account (default 2110)
vat_deduction_modeNoVAT deduction mode. Use partial with deductible_vat_amount.
deductible_vat_amountNoDeductible part of VAT when vat_deduction_mode=partial, or an explicit deductible VAT amount to override the default or configured ratio.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.29.2
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  2. Addedv0.25.3
  3. Removedv0.25.2
  4. First observedv0.18.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that a journal is produced, and omits the consequential behavioral fact that the call is non-idempotent (repeated calls create duplicate journals) and that it books a liability to the owner.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the verb appears first. It is efficient, though extremely terse for a 12-parameter booking operation.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Annotations carry the mutation safety profile and the schema fully documents parameters, with no output schema needed for return values. What is still missing is the double-entry behavior (expense account debited, payable-to-owner credited) and the non-idempotency caveat an agent should know before calling.

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 all 12 parameters including vat_rate decimals, defaults (1510, 2110), and vat_deduction_mode are already documented. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Create) and resource (a journal for a business expense paid personally by the owner), and the owner-reimbursement framing separates it from the generic create_journal sibling. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

The description gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. the owner client must already exist), and never contrasts this with create_journal or create_transaction. The agent must infer the routing condition entirely.

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