lexware-mcp-server

List Voucherlist

lexware_list_voucherlist

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search and filter all Lexware voucher types to find invoices, credit notes, quotations, and more using dates, status, contact, and type filters.

Instructions

Search and filter across all voucher types in Lexware. This is the main way to find invoices, credit notes, quotations, and other voucher types.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No	Page number (0-indexed)
`size`	No	Results per page (max 250)
`sort`	No	Sort by voucherDate, voucherNumber, createdDate or updatedDate, followed by ASC or DESC, e.g. "updatedDate,DESC".
`archived`	No	Filter by archived status
`contactId`	No	Filter by contact UUID
`contactName`	No	Wildcard filter on contactName, applied client-side after fetching. % = any sequence, _ = exactly one character. Case-insensitive. Example: "Müller%". Implies fetchAllPages.
`voucherType`	No	Voucher type(s), comma-separated, or "any" for no type filter (default). Values: invoice, creditnote, orderconfirmation, quotation, deliverynote, downpaymentinvoice, dunning, purchaseinvoice, purchasecreditnote	any
`createdDateTo`	No	Filter by creation date to (yyyy-MM-dd)
`fetchAllPages`	No	When true, follow pagination until every page is retrieved (capped at 100 requests) instead of returning a single page.
`hasOpenAmount`	No	When true, keep only entries with openAmount > 0. Applied client-side after fetching. Implies fetchAllPages.
`updatedDateTo`	No	Filter by last modification date to (yyyy-MM-dd, full day in CET/CEST)
`voucherDateTo`	No	Filter vouchers to date (ISO, e.g. "2024-12-31")
`voucherNumber`	No	Filter by voucher number
`voucherStatus`	No	Voucher status(es), comma-separated, or "any" for no status filter (default). Values: draft, open, overdue, paid, paidoff, voided, transferred, sepadebit, accepted, rejected, unchecked. overdue cannot be combined with other statuses.	any
`createdDateFrom`	No	Filter by creation date from (yyyy-MM-dd)
`updatedDateFrom`	No	Filter by last modification date from (yyyy-MM-dd, full day in CET/CEST)
`voucherDateFrom`	No	Filter vouchers from date (ISO, e.g. "2024-01-01")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv5.3.0Oct 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / sort

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Sort by voucherDate, voucherNumber, createdDate or updatedDate, followed by ASC or DESC, e.g. \"updatedDate,DESC\".",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / updatedDateFrom

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filter by last modification date from (yyyy-MM-dd, full day in CET/CEST)",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / updatedDateTo

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filter by last modification date to (yyyy-MM-dd, full day in CET/CEST)",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / voucherStatus / description

Previous value: -"Voucher status(es), comma-separated, or \"any\" for no status filter (default). Values: draft, open, overdue, paid, paidoff, voided, accepted, rejected, unchecked"New value: +"Voucher status(es), comma-separated, or \"any\" for no status filter (default). Values: draft, open, overdue, paid, paidoff, voided, transferred, sepadebit, accepted, rejected, unchecked. overdue cannot be combined with other statuses."

Changed3 schema fields changedv5.2.0Aug 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / contactName

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Wildcard filter on contactName, applied client-side after fetching. % = any sequence, _ = exactly one character. Case-insensitive. Example: \"Müller%\". Implies fetchAllPages.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / fetchAllPages

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "When true, follow pagination until every page is retrieved (capped at 100 requests) instead of returning a single page.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / hasOpenAmount

Added value: +{
+  "description": "When true, keep only entries with openAmount > 0. Applied client-side after fetching. Implies fetchAllPages.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Changed4 schema fields changedv5.0.0Jul 27, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / voucherStatus / default
```
Added value: +"any"
```

changedInput schema / properties / voucherStatus / description

Previous value: -"Voucher status(es), comma-separated or \"any\". Values: draft, open, overdue, paid, paidoff, voided, accepted, rejected, unchecked"New value: +"Voucher status(es), comma-separated, or \"any\" for no status filter (default). Values: draft, open, overdue, paid, paidoff, voided, accepted, rejected, unchecked"

addedInput schema / properties / voucherType / default
```
Added value: +"any"
```

changedInput schema / properties / voucherType / description

Previous value: -"Voucher type(s), comma-separated or \"any\". Values: invoice, creditnote, orderconfirmation, quotation, deliverynote, downpaymentinvoice, dunning, purchaseinvoice, purchasecreditnote"New value: +"Voucher type(s), comma-separated, or \"any\" for no type filter (default). Values: invoice, creditnote, orderconfirmation, quotation, deliverynote, downpaymentinvoice, dunning, purchaseinvoice, purchasecreditnote"

First observedv3.0.0May 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds nothing beyond that — it omits the notable behaviors documented only in the schema (client-side filters like contactName/hasOpenAmount, implied fetchAllPages, 100-request pagination cap).

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, front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence is partly redundant with the first ('all voucher types' vs. listing voucher types), but nothing is bloated.

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 17-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description is thin: it says nothing about result shape, default page size, or the client-side-vs-server-side filter distinction that materially affects how an agent should query. Annotations and the schema cover the rest, so it is adequate but not complete.

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% across all 17 parameters, so the schema fully documents the filtering, sorting and pagination semantics. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning, which makes the baseline 3 correct.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Search and filter across all voucher types') and enumerates the document kinds it covers (invoices, credit notes, quotations). It does not, however, differentiate itself from the sibling lexware_list_vouchers, which an agent could easily confuse with this tool.

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?

It claims to be 'the main way to find invoices, credit notes, quotations', which implies a default usage stance, but it never states conditions, prerequisites, or when a sibling (e.g. lexware_list_vouchers) would be preferred. Usage is implied rather than explained.

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

Deploy Server

List Voucherlist

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools