Skip to main content
Glama

Laso Finance

by finance.laso
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

list_card_transactions

List reloadable card transactions

Returns transactions on the authenticated user's reloadable cards, newest first: amount, merchant, status, and timestamps.

Pass card_id for one card's history, or omit it for every reloadable card on the account. Filter with status and cap the page with limit.

This route covers reloadable cards only. The two non-reloadable products keep their history in Laso's own records and are read through /get-card-data.

If the wallet has no card issuer account linked, the list is empty and a note explains how the account holder sets one up at https://laso.finance/agent/dashboard/verified/card.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of transactions to return. Defaults to the issuer's own page size (20).
statusNoFilter by status, e.g. `pending`, `settled`, `declined`, `reversed`, `refunded`.
card_idNoReturn only this card's transactions. Omit for every reloadable card on the account.
auth_tokenNoLaso credential. Only if the MCP connection has no Authorization header.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "note": {
-      "description": "Present only when no card issuer account is linked.",
-      "type": [
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "transactions": {
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "amount": {
-            "description": "Transaction amount in US dollars.",
-            "type": [
-              "number",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "card_id": {
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "created_at": {
-            "description": "Milliseconds since the epoch.",
-            "type": [
-              "number",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "issuer_status": {
-            "description": "The issuer's own status string, kept verbatim for support.",
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "merchant": {
-            "description": "Merchant name, when the issuer reports one.",
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "status": {
-            "description": "Lowercased status, e.g. `settled`.",
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          },
-          "transaction_id": {
-            "type": [
-              "string",
-              "null"
-            ]
-          }
-        },
-        "type": [
-          "object",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "type": [
-        "array",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the burden and covers ordering (newest first), output fields, the empty-list behavior when no issuer account is linked, and the note explaining setup. It does not mention authentication requirements beyond 'authenticated user' or error/rate-limit behavior, but the read-only nature is clear from 'List'/'Returns'.

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 description is five sentences, all relevant, and front-loaded with the tool's purpose before usage and edge-case detail. It is somewhat repetitive about 'reloadable' and the note about no issuer account could be considered extra, but each sentence adds useful context for selection or invocation.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is nearly complete: it names return fields, ordering, filtering, the card-scope behavior, the non-reloadable alternative, and the empty-wallet edge case with a setup link. It stops short of describing response pagination beyond the limit parameter or error cases, but an agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 the schema already documents limit, status, card_id, and auth_token fully. The description mostly repeats that guidance ('Pass card_id... omit it', 'Filter with status', 'cap the page with limit') without adding new parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 leads with a specific verb-resource pair ('List reloadable card transactions') and immediately states what is returned (amount, merchant, status, timestamps, newest first). It also disambiguates the scope from non-reloadable products and names /get-card-data as the sibling for those, so the agent can distinguish this tool without opening the 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?

It gives explicit invocation guidance: pass card_id for one card, omit it for all reloadable cards, use status to filter, and limit to cap page size. It also states the exclusion ('reloadable cards only') and directs non-reloadable history to /get-card-data, making the when-to-use/when-not-to-use decision explicit.

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

All Laso Finance 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