Skip to main content
Glama
ohneben

Buchhaltungsbutler MCP

by ohneben
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Cost Locations: update cost location

cost_locations_update
Idempotent

Update a cost location's code or name in Buchhaltungsbutler to correct errors or adjust to organizational changes. Overwrites sent fields; read current record first to keep other values.

Instructions

🟡 WRITE · updates data: Modifies existing master data in place.

update cost location

Update a cost location's name/description.

Use to rename an existing cost centre or change its number.

Overwrites the fields you send. Read the current record with cost_locations_list first if you intend a partial change.

Endpoint: POST /cost-locations/update

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeYesThe cost location code
nameYesThe updated name/description of the cost location

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
messageNoblank
successYesSuccess boolean

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.2
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "message": {
+      "description": "blank",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "description": "Success boolean",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / api_key
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Optional. The BB customer api_key to act on. Defaults to the BB_API_KEY configured on the server — only set this to target a different customer.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses that updates happen in placeclip, that sent fields are overwritten, and that a preceding read is needed for partial changes. Annotations already label it as a write and non-destructive operation; the description adds useful overwrite behavior without contradicting the annotations.

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?

The description is short and front-loaded with the action and scope. It contains some redundancy with the repeated 'update cost location' heading and the endpoint line, but most sentences earn their place by adding behavioral guidance.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given only two required parameters, an existing output schema, and annotations covering write/idempotency/non-destructiveness, the description is mostly complete. It lacks an example or clear explanation of how `code` behaves when changing a number, but that is a minor gap.

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%, so `code` and `name` are already documented directly. The description adds the rename/number use case but does not clarify whether `code` is the record identifier or the new number, so it adds only marginal semantics over the schema.

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 that it modifies existing cost locations in place, and specifies the target fields (name/description) and use cases (rename a cost centre or change its number). It is clearly distinct from create/list/delete siblings, though 'change its number' is ambiguous relative to the `code`/`name` schema fields.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly tells the agent to use the tool for renaming or changing an existing cost centre, and instructs reading `cost_locations_list` first before a partial change. It does not explicitly name create/delete as alternatives, but the 'existing' wording makes the intended context clear.

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