Jornalo — futures trading journal

List accounts

list_accounts

Read-only

Every trading account: broker/prop-firm account id, prop firm, category (evaluation | funded | live), account type, status (active | inactive | unlinked), first and last trade dates and trade count. Users refer to accounts loosely — "the 996", "my Apex funded", "the Lucid eval", "the one ending in 863": resolve against this list by id suffix, prop firm and category; if more than one account fits, ask which one instead of guessing. Ids feed the other tools.

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_accounts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false), so the lower bar applies. The description adds real value beyond that: it specifies the returned field set (with an output schema absent) and, unusually, an ambiguity-resolution policy. It does not discuss ordering or whether the list can be large, leaving a minor gap.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource and field inventory, then pivots to the disambiguation rule that is the genuinely non-obvious part. Dense and slightly run-on in the field enumeration, but every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 input parameters and no output schema, the description must carry the whole contract, and it does: it lists the returned fields, declares the enumeration complete ('every'), and supplies the disambiguation procedure needed to use ids downstream. Nothing essential 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?

The tool takes no parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly reflects this by saying 'Every trading account' with no filter or paging options implied.

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+resource (list every trading account) and enumerates the exact fields returned — broker/prop-firm id, prop firm, category, type, status, trade dates and count. No sibling tool covers accounts, so it is unambiguously distinguishable within the toolset.

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 operating guidance: resolve loose user references ('the 996', 'my Apex funded') by id suffix, prop firm and category, and ask rather than guess on ambiguity. It also notes ids feed other tools, implying this list is the lookup entry point. It stops short of explicit when-not or alternative-tool routing.

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

All Jornalo — futures trading journal 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?