Skip to main content
Glama

ExpenseBot

by io.github.TotesMagotes
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

check_compliance

Read-only

Use only when the user explicitly asks to check an existing report for compliance issues such as missing business purpose or policy violations. Creating a report, excluding Personal expenses, sharing a report, or billing a client is not a compliance request; never call this tool automatically as a preflight or follow-up for those workflows.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
reportIdYesReport ID to check
analysisRequestedYesSet true only when the user explicitly asked for this report's compliance analysis. Do not ask for or copy their full message, and do not infer consent from report creation, sharing, or billing.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
messageNo
successYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / analysisRequested
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Set true only when the user explicitly asked for this report's compliance analysis. Do not ask for or copy their full message, and do not infer consent from report creation, sharing, or billing.",
+  "enum": [
+    true
+  ],
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / userRequest
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "The user's exact request explicitly asking for compliance, policy, audit, substantiation, or business-purpose analysis. Do not paraphrase or invent intent.",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "reportId",
-  "userRequest"
-]New value: +[
+  "reportId",
+  "analysisRequested"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "description": "Standard ExpenseBot tool result envelope. `message` is the human-readable summary the AI cites; `data` is the structured payload (totals, breakdowns, ids, etc.). On failure, `success` is false and `error` carries a code/message/hint triple.",
-  "properties": {
-    "data": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "description": "Structured payload. Shape varies per tool — common keys: total, breakdown, comparison, sampleMeta, ids, expenseId, reportId, signupUrl, results.",
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "error": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "description": "Present only when success === false.",
-      "properties": {
-        "code": {
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        "hint": {
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        "message": {
-          "type": "string"
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "message": {
-      "description": "Human-readable result text. Always present on success; prefer rendering this verbatim before any further reasoning.",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "sampleMeta": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "description": "Set when the underlying dataset was truncated. isTruncated=true means the agent saw a sample of `sampleCount` of `totalCount` rows; aggregate totals are still accurate.",
-      "properties": {
-        "isTruncated": {
-          "type": "boolean"
-        },
-        "sampleCount": {
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "totalCount": {
-          "type": "integer"
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "success": {
-      "description": "False on tool errors; check before reading `data`.",
-      "type": "boolean"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: the explicit anti-automation guardrail and the 'do not infer consent' rule, which constrain how the agent may trigger it.

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, the positive trigger front-loaded and the exclusions following. Every clause is load-bearing for correct invocation; there is no filler.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover safety. The description covers the remaining gap — precise trigger conditions and prohibitions — so an agent has everything needed 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% and the analysisRequested description already explains the explicit-consent requirement, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description reinforces but adds no syntax or format detail beyond it; baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('check an existing report for compliance issues') and names what those issues are (missing business purpose, policy violations). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like create_report and fix_compliance.

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?

Explicit when-to-use ('only when the user explicitly asks') plus an enumerated when-not list (creating a report, excluding Personal expenses, sharing, billing) and a prohibition on automatic preflight/follow-up invocation. Nothing about invocation conditions is left to inference.

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

All ExpenseBot 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