Buchhaltungsbutler MCP

Transactions: assign receipt to transaction

transactions_assign_receipts

Assign receipts to bank transactions to match payments with proof documents. Link one or many receipt-transaction pairs in a single request.

Instructions

🟡 WRITE · links/unlinks records: Creates or removes an assignment between records (e.g. receipt ↔ transaction). Reversible.

assign receipt to transaction

Assign a receipt to a transaction.

Use to match receipts to the bank transactions that paid them, one pair or many at once.

To attach a receipt to a posting rather than a bank transaction, use postings_assign_receipt_to_free.

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

Reversible with transactions_unassign_receipt. Creating the link does not book anything: use postings_create_for_transaction to post the transaction.

Endpoint: POST /transactions/assign-batch/receipt

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`transactions_to_receipts`	Yes	list of receipts to transactions maximum of 50 element are allowed

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`errors`	No
`success`	Yes	is the request successful or faulty
`transactions_to_receipts`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.1.2Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false), but the description adds valuable behavioral context: it links/unlinks records, is reversible, and does not book anything. It also clarifies batch behavior (one or many). This goes beyond what annotations provide and adds no contradiction.

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 well-structured with a summary line, usage guidance, and clear exclusions. Each sentence earns its place without redundancy. It is longer than minimal but not wasteful, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 batch assignment tool, the description covers purpose, usage, alternatives, reversibility, and side effects (non-booking). The output schema exists, so return values are implicitly handled. With annotations already covering safety, nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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?

The schema already documents the single parameter `transactions_to_receipts` with its nested structure and descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds minor context (e.g., 'a single record is an array of one') but does not substantially enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 assigns receipts to transactions, and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling `postings_assign_receipt_to_free` for attaching to postings. It uses a specific verb (assign) and resource (receipt ↔ transaction), making the purpose unambiguous and differentiating it from similar tools.

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?

The description gives explicit guidance: use it to match receipts to bank transactions, and when not to (attach to a posting) points to an alternative. It also mentions reversibility with `transactions_unassign_receipt` and clarifies that creating the link does not book anything, which informs the agent about the proper workflow.

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

Deploy Server