Skip to main content
Glama

YESbusiness

Analysis

get_analysis
Read-onlyIdempotent

One call for an analysis over a date range: the NET MOVEMENT per account per month or quarter (group_by 'account'), or the booking totals per counterparty per period (group_by 'counterparty' — the counterparty is the booking's description, so recurring items like a landlord, a telecom provider or a customer group together). Use it for trends, seasonality, 'which months were expensive', 'how much did we pay X over the year' and 'top counterparties'; for a statement's official figures use get_income_statement / get_balance_sheet. Only complete bookings count. The result is {home_currency, periods, rows}: periods are labels ('2026-01' or '2026-Q1', oldest first), each row has one cell per period in the same order plus total_cents, all integers in CENTS of the home currency — divide by 100. For accounts, a cell is debits minus credits in the period: positive means the account grew on its debit side (an expense incurred, an asset acquired), negative on its credit side (revenue earned, a liability taken on). Rows are sorted by total, largest absolute amount first, capped at 100 (rows_truncated says if more existed). cost_center_id restricts the figures to the legs carrying that cost center (ids from get_cost_centers).

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": {
      "date_from": "<date_from>",
      "date_to": "<date_to>",
      "company_id": "<company_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_analysis"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
date_toYesEnd of the range, YYYY-MM-DD, inclusive.
group_byNoRows per account (default) or per counterparty (booking description).
date_fromYesStart of the range, YYYY-MM-DD, inclusive.
company_idYesThe company to work on — one of list_my_companies' company_id values.
granularityNoPeriod size (default month). Quarters are calendar quarters.
cost_center_idNoOnly legs carrying this cost center (id from get_cost_centers).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds substantive behavior beyond them: only complete bookings are counted, rows are sorted by absolute total descending, output is capped at 100 with a rows_truncated flag, and all amounts are integers in cents of the home currency requiring division by 100. It even explains the sign convention (debit minus credit) needed to read results correctly.

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 core operation and result shape are front-loaded, and the long middle sentence is dense but every clause carries information an agent needs (period labels, cell ordering, cents, sign meaning). It is slightly overlong as a single block, but there is little wasted wording.

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?

With no output schema, the description takes full responsibility and discharges it: it specifies the result object {home_currency, periods, rows}, period label format and ordering, per-row cell alignment, total_cents, truncation signaling, and unit conventions. Nothing material for correct invocation or interpretation is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description earns extra: it explains that counterparty means the booking description so recurring counterparties group together, that granularity produces labels like '2026-01' or '2026-Q1' oldest-first, and that cost_center_id filters to legs carrying that cost center. Remaining gaps are minor (no date-format or company_id guidance 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?

The description opens with a specific deliverable: net movement per account per month/quarter under group_by='account', or booking totals per counterparty under group_by='counterparty'. It explicitly separates itself from get_income_statement / get_balance_sheet by naming them as the tools for official statement figures, so an agent can choose without opening either 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?

Use cases are enumerated concretely (trends, seasonality, which months were expensive, how much paid to X over a year, top counterparties), and the exclusion is explicit: official statement figures belong to get_income_statement / get_balance_sheet. It also routes the agent to get_cost_centers for valid cost_center_id values.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources