stub

Update transaction

update_transaction

Destructive

Edit the imported BANK LINE by id, not the accounting entry categorised from it; to recategorise or re-attribute, use save_expense or save_income. Send id with the fields to change, or an items array to change many in one call. items is partial success: owned lines are written and the rest come back in errors. An item with deleted true bins the line and the income/expense derived from it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	ID of the transaction to update. Omit when sending items.
`date`	No	Transaction date, YYYY-MM-DD
`items`	No	Several transactions to update in one call. Partial success: owned ids are written and the rest come back in `errors`. `deleted` true bins the transaction and the income/expense derived from it.
`notes`	No	Additional notes about the transaction
`value`	No	Transaction amount in the base currency
`ignored`	No	Whether to exclude this transaction from the ledger
`description`	No	Description of the transaction

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed10 schema fields changedSep 28, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / basecurrency

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "The base currency of the business",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / creditjournal

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "ID of the account to credit",
-  "type": "string"
-}

changedInput schema / properties / date / description

Previous value: -"Transaction date"New value: +"Transaction date, YYYY-MM-DD"

addedInput schema / properties / date / pattern
```
Added value: +"^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$"
```

removedInput schema / properties / debitjournal

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "ID of the account to debit",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / exchangerate

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Exchange rate if transaction currency differs from base currency",
-  "type": "number"
-}

changedInput schema / properties / id / description

Previous value: -"ID of the transaction, only required for updates"New value: +"ID of the transaction to update. Omit when sending items."

changedInput schema / properties / ignored / description

Previous value: -"Whether to ignore this transaction in reports"New value: +"Whether to exclude this transaction from the ledger"

addedInput schema / properties / items

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Several transactions to update in one call. Partial success: owned ids are written and the rest come back in `errors`. `deleted` true bins the transaction and the income/expense derived from it.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "date": {
+        "description": "Transaction date, YYYY-MM-DD",
+        "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "deleted": {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "description": {
+        "description": "Description of the transaction",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "id": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "ignored": {
+        "description": "Whether to exclude this transaction from the ledger",
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "notes": {
+        "description": "Additional notes about the transaction",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "value": {
+        "description": "Transaction amount in the base currency",
+        "type": "number"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "id"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 1000,
+  "minItems": 1,
+  "type": "array"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / transactioncurrency

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "The currency of the transaction if different from base currency",
-  "type": "string"
-}

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds genuine context beyond that: batch 'items' calls are partial-success (written ids vs 'errors'), and 'deleted: true' bins the line AND the income/expense derived from it. That disclosure of cascading effects is valuable, though it doesn't cover auth requirements or reversibility of edits.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the scoping constraint, then the alternatives, then batch/delete semantics. No filler and every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers what it edits, the batch partial-success/error return shape, and the destructive 'deleted' cascade. Dense and sufficient, with only minor gaps around permissions/reversibility.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter including the id/items relationship ('Omit when sending items'). The description reinforces the batch semantics but adds little field-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the 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?

States a specific verb ('Edit') and a precisely scoped resource ('the imported BANK LINE by id'), and explicitly distinguishes it from the accounting entry categorised from it. An agent can tell this apart from save_expense/save_income without opening any schema.

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?

Names the alternatives directly ('to recategorise or re-attribute, use save_expense or save_income') and gives the condition that routes the agent there. It also spells out the single-vs-batch invocation modes (id vs items).

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

All stub tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?