Buchhaltungsbutler MCP

Postings: add receipt posting

postings_create_for_receipt

Adds postings to existing receipts, splitting each across posting accounts, VAT rates, and cost centres. For booking receipts stored in BuchhaltungsButler.

Instructions

🟡 WRITE · creates data: Creates new records (receipts, transactions, postings, invoices, master data). Not idempotent: calling twice may create duplicates.

add receipt posting

Add postings for a specified receipt. Important: Receipt postings are only available if creditor or debtor posting is activated!

IMPORTANT: If you add postings to a receipt with foreign currency, you have to get that receipt (/receipts/get/id_by_customer) and find the calculated amount before performing this request.

Use to book one or more receipts that already exist in BuchhaltungsButler, splitting each across posting accounts, VAT rates and cost centres.

For a journal entry with no receipt behind it, use postings_create_free.

Takes one or many: pass an array of receipts in receipts. A single record is an array of one.

The per-receipt arrays (postingaccounts, amounts, vats, postingtexts) are positional: index 0 of each describes the same split line, so they must all have the same length. Not idempotent. Reversible with postings_unconfirm_for_receipt while the posting is not fixed.

Endpoint: POST /postings/add-batch/receipts

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`receipts`	Yes	an array of receipt postings, each receipt posting has the same field declaration and validation as the postings/add/receipt endpoint

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`errors`	No
`success`	Yes	Success boolean
`receipts`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.1.2Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, and the description repeats the 'Not idempotent' trait. However, it adds valuable context beyond annotations: reversibility with `postings_unconfirm_for_receipt` while not fixed, the foreign currency prerequisite, and the 'WRITE' marker. No contradiction with 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 lengthy but well-organized with headers, bolded key points, and a clear logical flow. Every sentence adds relevant information (prerequisites, array semantics, reversal). It is not overly verbose given the complexity of the operation.

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?

The description covers all necessary steps: prerequisites (activation), special case (foreign currency), array structure, distinction from sibling tool, and reversal method. It does not explain return values, but an output schema exists, so that is not required. For a complex mutation tool, this is highly complete.

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?

The schema itself provides descriptions for each parameter, so coverage is high. The description adds crucial structural meaning beyond the schema: the positional relationship across arrays (index 0 of each describes the same split line) and the one-or-many array convention. This clarifies usage not evident from individual parameter schemas.

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 tool's purpose: 'Add postings for a specified receipt' and 'book one or more receipts that already exist', distinguishing it from `postings_create_free` which is for journal entries without receipts. It also specifies the resource (receipts) and the action (adding postings), making it unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly explains when to use this tool (for existing receipts) and when not (use `postings_create_free` for journal entries without receipts). It also lists prerequisites (creditor/debtor posting activated) and a special condition (foreign currency requires fetching receipt first). No alternative is left vague.

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

Deploy Server