Skip to main content
Glama

Beancount.io

Import Staged Bank Transactions

importStagedBankTransactions

Write staged bank transactions into the ledger as directives, each booked against the given target account. dry_run returns the result and projected validation without committing.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dryRunNoAlias of dry_run, as REST and GraphQL spell it.
ledgerNoTarget ledger as owner/name. Required for an unpinned credential; defaults to the credential's ledger restriction.
dry_runNoValidate and report what would change, without changing anything.
filenameNoWhich ledger file to append to. Must exist.
transactionsYesThe staged transactions to write.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
errorNo
resultNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / dryRun
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Alias of dry_run, as REST and GraphQL spell it.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / transactions / items / properties / sourceAccount
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Overrides the source account normally derived from the mapping.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / transactions / items / properties / source_account / description
      Added value: +"Alias of sourceAccount."
    • addedInput schema / properties / transactions / items / properties / targetAccount
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The ledger account to book this against.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / properties / transactions / items / properties / target_account / description
      Previous value: -"The ledger account to book this against."New value: +"Alias of targetAccount."
    • addedInput schema / properties / transactions / items / properties / transactionId
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The staged row's `transactionId` from listStagedBankTransactions — not its `id`.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / properties / transactions / items / properties / transaction_id / description
      Previous value: -"The staged row's `transactionId` from listStagedBankTransactions — not its `id`."New value: +"Alias of transactionId."
    • removedInput schema / properties / transactions / items / required
      Removed value: -[
      -  "transaction_id",
      -  "target_account"
      -]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, so the mutation profile is known. The description adds real value by explaining that dry_run validates and reports without committing, but it is silent on the consequence of idempotentHint=false — whether re-running with the same transactionIds creates duplicate directives or is deduplicated — which is exactly the risk an agent needs flagged for a ledger write.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, front-loaded with the write action and followed by the dry-run caveat. No filler and nothing redundant with the schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the schema documents ledger/filename defaults thoroughly. However, for a financial write with idempotentHint=false, the description omits what happens to staged rows after import and whether a repeat run duplicates entries, leaving a meaningful gap for the agent's decision-making.

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%, including nested item fields and the transactionId-vs-id distinction, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description only gestures at targetAccount ('booked against the given target account') and adds nothing about ledger, filename, or alias precedence, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Write staged bank transactions into the ledger as directives') and clarifies that each is booked against a target account. It implicitly separates this from addLedgerEntries or insertReceiptTransaction by naming 'staged bank transactions' as the input domain, but it never names an alternative tool explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The only usage guidance is embedded in the dry_run sentence, which explains what a non-committing run does. There is no explicit statement of prerequisites (that rows must first come from listStagedBankTransactions), no when-not-to-use, and no pointer to the sibling that discards or lists staged rows.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.