Beyond Payday

Get a what-if scenario

beyondpayday_get_scenario

Read-only

Returns one saved what-if scenario as the What-if page shows it: each stacked life change (change_id, paused) with its rows — the user's related items, each with its row key, today's amount, the choices it allows and its current one (Keep / Remove / Sell / Trade in / Pay off / Replace and the replacement amount), or changed_by when another change already changes that item — its "Also add?" chips, new items, and its purchase (price, down payment, rate, term, closing costs, the accounts paying and their amounts, loans); "Something else" (items taken out by hand, items added by hand, older purchases); and totals: money left over, bills (monthly) and net worth before → after, computed by Beyond Payday with the page's own math — report them, never recompute them. Use the ids and keys with beyondpayday_update_scenario and pass updated_at as expected_updated_at. Only the family owner or spouse/partner can read it, with What-if planner, income, bills and assets access. Figures are estimates from user-entered data — not tax, financial, investment, insurance, or legal advice.

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": {
      "scenario_id": "<scenario_id>"
    },
    "name": "beyondpayday_get_scenario"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`scenario_id`	Yes	The scenario id (beyondpayday_list_scenarios).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedSep 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only cover readOnlyHint/openWorldHint; the description adds real behavioral context: required roles and feature access, a concurrency hint (updated_at/expected_updated_at), the authoritative-compute rule ('report them, never recompute them'), and a data-provenance disclaimer. The bulk of the text is return-shape description rather than behavior, which keeps it just under a 5.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded, but the body is a single dense run-on with nested quotation marks, semicolons and em-dashes that is hard to parse. Much of the length is justified by the absence of an output schema, yet the structure could be far more scannable.

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 read tool with no output schema and nested scenario data, the description thoroughly enumerates the return structure (life changes, rows, chips, purchases, 'Something else', totals), plus permissions, chaining ids and disclaimers. An agent has essentially everything it needs to call and interpret it.

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% and there is a single required string parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add syntax or format detail for scenario_id beyond what the schema and its enum-style pattern already provide.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Returns one saved what-if scenario.' The scope (one scenario, as the What-if page shows it) clearly distinguishes it from beyondpayday_list_scenarios (many) and beyondpayday_update_scenario (mutation), both of which it names.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete chaining guidance ('Use the ids and keys with beyondpayday_update_scenario and pass updated_at as expected_updated_at') and states access prerequisites (family owner or spouse/partner, with What-if planner, income, bills and assets access). It lacks an explicit 'to find the scenario id, call list_scenarios' routing statement inside the description, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Beyond Payday 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?