Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
lexware-mcp-server

lexware-mcp-server

by lazyants
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Deeplink to Voucher

lexware_deeplink_voucher
Read-onlyIdempotent

Generate a direct link to view or edit a bookkeeping voucher in Lexware. Provide a voucher UUID to retrieve the URL.

Instructions

Get a direct link to view/edit a bookkeeping voucher in the Lexware web app.

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": {
      "voucherId": "<voucherId>"
    },
    "name": "lexware_deeplink_voucher"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
voucherIdYesVoucher UUID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv5.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by specifying the output (a direct link) and the dual view/edit capability. This context goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 a single 13-word sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word contributes meaning. It is maximally concise.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, clear annotations), the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns (a link) and its purpose, which is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter voucherId, which already has a clear description. The tool description does not add any extra meaning or usage details beyond the schema, so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'direct link to view/edit a bookkeeping voucher', precisely indicating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes itself from siblings like lexware_get_voucher (which retrieves voucher data) and other deeplink tools.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

While the description implies usage (for obtaining a deeplink), it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like lexware_get_voucher or other deeplink tools. No 'when-not' or alternative guidance is provided.

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