Buchhaltungsbutler MCP

Receipts: get all transactions assigned to a specific receipt

receipts_list_assigned_transactions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Get all bank transactions assigned to a specific receipt to verify whether an invoice has been matched to a payment. Confirm linked transactions using the receipt ID.

Instructions

🟢 READ-ONLY: Fetches data. Makes no changes to the accounting records.

get all transactions assigned to a specific receipt

Get all transactions assigned to a specific receipt for a specified customer account by id_by_customer. You can get the "id_by_customer" by using the "/receipts/get method" first.

Use to see which bank transactions are linked to a given receipt, for example to check whether an invoice has been matched to a payment.

For the opposite direction, use transactions_list_assigned_receipts.

Endpoint: POST /receipts/assigned-transactions/get

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`confirmed_only`	No	If true, only confirmed assignments will be returned. If specified, the field will be validated.
`receipt_id_by_customer`	Yes	The id_by_customer of the receipt.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`data`	No	An array of transactions data
`rows`	No	Number of returned rows
`message`	No	blank
`success`	Yes	Success boolean

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.3Sep 26, 2026
- changedOutput schema / properties / data / items / properties / id_by_customer / type
```
Previous value: -"string"New value: +[
+  "string",
+  "integer"
+]
```
Addedv1.1.2Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, and the description mostly repeats that by saying READ-ONLY and 'Makes no changes.' It adds the prerequisite for obtaining id_by_customer, but does not go beyond annotations in depth.

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?

Well-structured and mostly front-loaded, but the READ-ONLY line and bold description repeat the title and annotations. Still, every section serves a purpose and the text is compact.

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?

Complete for a two-parameter read-only tool: it provides the use case, alternative direction, prerequisite lookup, and endpoint, while the annotations and output schema cover safety and return values.

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 the baseline applies. The description reinforces that receipt_id_by_customer is the key parameter and how to get it, but does not add additional meaning beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: get all transactions assigned to a specific receipt. It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling transactions_list_assigned_receipts by naming it as the opposite direction.

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?

Gives an explicit use case ('check whether an invoice has been matched to a payment'), tells the user how to obtain the required id_by_customer via /receipts/get, and routes to the alternative tool for the reverse lookup.

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

Deploy Server