Skip to main content
Glama
loldwyer

Red MCP Server

by loldwyer

brc_create_cash_payment

Create a cash payment in BRC for supplier ledger, bank lodgement, or analysed expenses. Uses a preflight confirmation draft to verify details before final posting.

Instructions

Creates a BRC cash payment. Use supplierId + ledger for supplier payments, bankAccountId + lodgement for bank lodgements, or analysisCategoryId + accountCode for analysed expenses. Analysis categories must be from the Cash Payments book (CP01-CP03) and accountCode must match the category. First call without confirmWrite: true returns confirmation_required and a payload preview — show a plain-English draft in chat, then retry with confirmWrite: true only after explicit user confirmation in a later message. Passing preflight is not confirmation. Also requires confirmCounterpartyExplicit: true once the user has explicitly named or confirmed the customer/supplier in the current conversation. Do not reuse a counterparty from an earlier draft without that confirmation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteYes
totalYes
acCodeNoSupplier account code for ledger payments.
ledgerNoLedger amount; must equal total for supplier payments.
discountNo
procDateNoProcessing date in ISO format. Defaults to entryDate.
entryDateNoEntry date in ISO format. Defaults to today.
lodgementNoLodgement amount; must equal total when lodging to bank.
supplierIdNoSupplier id for ledger payments.
accountCodeNoAnalysis account code matching analysisCategoryId, for example CP01.
companyNameYesCompany context name, for example YOUR-COMPANY-NAME.
descriptionNoAnalysis line description.
confirmWriteNoMust be true only after a plain-English draft has been shown in the current conversation and the user explicitly confirmed posting (for example yes, create it / post it now / confirm). Never set true on the first call or because the user initially asked to create something.
bankAccountIdNoBank account id for lodgements.
bookTranTypeIdNoCash Payment book transaction type id.
bankAccountCodeNoBank account code for lodgements.
analysisCategoryIdNoCash Payments analysis category id (categoryTypeId 1391170).
confirmCounterpartyExplicitNoMust be true only after the user explicitly named or confirmed the customer, supplier, or other counterparty in the current conversation. Never set true because a customer or supplier appeared in an earlier draft, was inferred from context, or was filled in without the user's explicit choice in this conversation.
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses critical behavioral traits: the two-step confirmation process, the role of confirmWrite and confirmCounterpartyExplicit, and the need for a plain-English draft. Without annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so effectively, though it omits details about the final success response.

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?

Concise and front-loaded: begins with the core purpose, then details use cases and workflow. Every sentence serves a purpose, with no wasted words.

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?

For a tool with 18 parameters, three use cases, and a complex confirmation workflow, the description is remarkably complete. It covers all essential aspects: parameter selection, confirmation steps, and counterparty confirmation. The workflow is fully explained, making it usable without additional context.

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?

Adds meaning beyond the schema by grouping parameters into use cases and explaining constraints (e.g., analysisCategoryId must be from CP01-CP03, accountCode must match). With 83% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, but the description provides high-value context that clarifies the intended parameter combinations.

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 precisely states it creates a BRC cash payment and enumerates three distinct use cases (supplier payments, bank lodgements, analysed expenses) with specific parameter groups. This clearly differentiates it from sibling create tools like brc_create_cash_receipt or brc_create_payment.

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?

Explicit instructions on when to use each parameter set (supplierId+ledger, bankAccountId+lodgement, analysisCategoryId+accountCode). Provides step-by-step workflow: first call without confirmWrite: true returns a draft, then retry with confirmWrite: true after user confirmation. Clarifies that preflight does not count as confirmation and that confirmCounterpartyExplicit requires explicit user naming.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/loldwyer/Red'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server