Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Acrium

by com.acriumautomated
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List budget entries

list_budget_entries
Read-onlyIdempotent

The budget ledger, line by line.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_budget_entries"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many (default 50).
all_timeNoEvery period, not just the current one.
project_idNoWorkspace to work in (from list_projects). Leave out for the default one.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that — no indication of default period scoping, ordering, pagination behavior, or what a 'line' contains.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is a single fragment with no waste, but it is under-specified rather than concise; the brevity costs information an agent needs rather than removing redundancy.

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 three-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description should at least say what is returned and how all_time versus the default period changes results. With rich annotations carrying the safety profile, the remaining behavioral gap is still substantial.

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 limit, all_time and project_id are already fully documented in the schema, including the cross-reference to list_projects. The description contributes no additional meaning, which lands at the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The line 'The budget ledger, line by line' is a poetic restatement of the title rather than a specification of the operation. It hints at enumerating line items but never states that it returns a paginated list of budget entries, and it does nothing to distinguish itself from the sibling get_budget.

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 statement of when to use this versus get_budget or get_billing, and no mention of prerequisites. The only implicit signal is that it is a list-style tool, which the name already conveys.

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

All Acrium toolsInspect
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