journalize

submit_directive

Submit one Beancount directive (open, transaction, close, balance, price, note, document — any type). Paid, except your first 20 accepted writes per registered key, which are free (this specific tool only — submit_batch is always paid, even for your first call). Call with no payment_header first: if free writes remain, this succeeds immediately; otherwise you'll get price/asset/recipient back, so you can retry with payment_header set to your signed X-PAYMENT-equivalent payload (fresh nonce required on the retry — each call is independently signed).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes
`nonce`	Yes
`signature`	Yes
`timestamp`	Yes
`public_key`	Yes
`payment_header`	No

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations, but description fully explains payment, free tier, and nonce requirements. However, error cases beyond payment are not detailed.

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?

Information-rich but somewhat verbose; could be more concise by separating workflow from parameter description.

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?

Covers main behavior and two outcomes (success or payment info), but lacks return value format and error handling context for a tool with no output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema coverage, description doesn't explain individual parameters (text, nonce, signature, etc.) beyond their role in the workflow.

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?

Clearly states it submits a Beancount directive (open, transaction, etc.) and differentiates from sibling submit_batch via free vs paid model.

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?

Explicitly explains the two-step process: call without payment_header first to get free writes, then on failure retry with payment_header and fresh nonce.

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

All journalize tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: account inquiries, financial reports, directive management, validation, key generation, and batch submission. No two tools overlap in functionality despite some being related reports.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case (e.g., export_ledger, get_balance_sheet, list_accounts). The naming is predictable and clear throughout.

Tool Count5/5

With 11 tools covering ledger management, reporting, validation, and key generation, the count is well-scoped for the server's purpose. Each tool justifies its existence without being too few or too many.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers essential operations for a Beancount ledger: submission of directives (single and batch), listing of accounts and directives, generation of key financial reports, balance queries, validation, and key registration. No obvious gaps are present.

Resources

Need Help?