Skip to main content
Glama
lazyants

lexware-mcp-server

by lazyants
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Create Article

lexware_create_article

Create a new product or service article with title, type, unit, price, and description; only description supports bold, italic, and list formatting.

Instructions

Create a new article. Only description supports Lexware formatting (bold, italic, and dash-prefixed list items separated by newlines); article title does not support formatting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYesArticle JSON with title, type ("PRODUCT"|"SERVICE"), unitName, price (leadingPrice, netPrice or grossPrice, taxRate), and description. Only description supports Lexware formatting (**bold**, __italic__, and dash-prefixed list items separated by newlines); article title does not support formatting.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv5.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / body / description
      Previous value: -"Article JSON. Key fields: title (string), type (\"PRODUCT\"|\"SERVICE\"), unitName, unitPrice (object with currency, netAmount, grossAmount, taxRatePercentage), description"New value: +"Article JSON with title, type (\"PRODUCT\"|\"SERVICE\"), unitName, price (leadingPrice, netPrice or grossPrice, taxRate), and description. Only description supports Lexware formatting (**bold**, __italic__, and dash-prefixed list items separated by newlines); article title does not support formatting."
  2. First observedv3.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the formatting constraint for description vs. title, which is genuinely useful context, but it is duplicated verbatim from the body schema rather than adding new behavioral detail (return value, auth, error modes).

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?

Two short sentences, purpose first, caveat second, with no filler. Slightly redundant given the same formatting text appears in the schema, but structurally sound and front-loaded.

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?

For a mutation tool with a single required nested object and no output schema, the definition covers the key formatting gotcha but omits what the call returns (e.g., the created article ID) and any error/permission behavior. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 the body parameter's structure (title, type, unitName, price, description) is already fully documented. The description's formatting note simply repeats the schema's body description text, adding no meaning beyond the structured field.

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?

The description states a clear verb+resource ('Create a new article'), so an agent immediately knows the operation. It does not differentiate from siblings like lexware_update_article or lexware_get_article, but the create semantics are 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus update_article, get_article, or create_quotation. The only usage-adjacent content is the formatting rule, which is about how to fill a field, not when to call the tool.

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