SAP Business One Order-to-Cash MCP Server

confirm_delivery_pod

Attach proof-of-delivery information to a delivery note by specifying its document entry and POD reference, with optional exceptions.

Instructions

Append proof-of-delivery information to a delivery note.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "deliveryDocEntry": "<deliveryDocEntry>",
      "podReference": "<podReference>"
    },
    "name": "confirm_delivery_pod"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`exceptions`	No
`podReference`	Yes
`deliveryDocEntry`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It only states that proof-of-delivery information is appended, but does not say whether repeated calls overwrite or add additional POD data, what happens when the delivery note does not exist, whether document status changes, or what side effects occur.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to stating the action and the target resource, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a mutating tool with three parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not explain how to identify the delivery note via deliveryDocEntry, what podReference should contain, what exceptions represents, or what the call returns or changes.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not explain deliveryDocEntry, podReference, or exceptions. The phrase 'proof-of-delivery information' hints that podReference is the POD reference, but no formats, meanings, or relationships between parameters are provided.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Append proof-of-delivery information to a delivery note.' This clearly indicates a modification of an existing delivery note, and the word 'append' distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_delivery that create new documents.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor any exclusions such as 'do not use for creating delivery notes.' The only implied usage is that a delivery note already exists, but prerequisites and relationship to other delivery-related tools are not explained.

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

Deploy Server