Skip to main content
Glama

Render a caller-computed cash position

well_render_cash_position
Read-only

Put a cash position YOU computed onto the cash card.

This tool measures nothing. It takes the figure and its method as input and returns them for rendering. Call it only after you have totalled the balances yourself and can state every field below from your own work — never to "get" a cash position.

The server derives no cash figure of its own here, which is why every field below is required: the policy behind a number is the only thing that makes it checkable.

Under the number the card draws nothing. It carries the total and the moment it was read. Every other field below, required or optional, reaches no pixel. All of it comes back in this tool's text result, which is what you write the prose from. The card is the measure; the explanation is yours.

REQUIRED, because a figure whose method is not stated cannot be checked:

  • amount and currency — the consolidated total. NEGATIVE is legal: an overdrawn workspace has negative cash, and this tool renders it rather than refusing it.

  • as_of — the moment the reading is valid for

  • accounts — every account that CONTRIBUTED, each with its native amount and currency, the converted amount, and the rate applied (null when it was already in currency). Carry institution_name and masked_account_number through from the balances read as well: your breakdown names each account by its bank, its name and its masked suffix, or by its currency when the bank and the name are both null, and never by its id.

  • scope — the account types you counted as cash, and whether you counted an account whose ownership is unsettled

  • excluded — what fell out, in four named groups: not owned, out-of-scope type, no readable balance, no FX rate. One merged count hides the difference between a rule the reader chose and a defect in the data.

  • partial — whether the total may be a floor (the skills' is_floor), because an account with no readable balance or no rate was left out of it. The result carries the value derived from excluded, whatever you state. It never means a cut-short read: that stops before this call.

REFUSED rather than rendered, each because the caller's own figures disagree with each other:

  • a total that is not the sum of the contributions listed — totalling a different set than you disclose publishes a figure nobody can audit

  • a converted amount that does not follow from its native amount and stated rate

  • an account already in currency that carries a rate other than one, or whose converted amount differs from its native one

  • an account in another currency that states no rate

  • the same account contributing twice

  • a non-zero total with no contributing accounts

  • an as_of in the future

  • a scope.account_types naming nothing

  • a balance_history that repeats a month or runs out of order

  • a currency outside ISO-4217 — checked against the catalog, not its shape

OPTIONAL:

  • balance_history — trailing complete month ends, oldest first. A null amount is a month no stored row covered; send it as a gap rather than dropping it or sending a zero, and never interpolate between two real points.

When the token authorizes one workspace, call this directly — no other tool call is needed first. When it authorizes several, this read will not guess which one you mean: pass workspace_id on the call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
as_ofYes
scopeYes
amountYes
partialYes
accountsYes
currencyYes
excludedYes
workspace_idNoTarget workspace. Omit when the token authorizes one workspace. Required when it authorizes several: this read reports one workspace's own figures and will not choose which.
balance_historyNo
conversation_idNoThe conversation id returned by the previous Well result, in its meta under well/conversation_id, in its structuredContent, or in its JSON text block. Pass it back on every call in the same conversation, including a call a card makes, so the chosen workspace and the earlier answers still apply. It decides the conversation on its own: nothing the host states about the session replaces it. Omit it only on the first call of a conversation.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
as_ofYes
scopeYes
amountYes
partialYes
successYes
accountsYes
currencyYes
excludedYes
computed_byYes
balance_historyNo
conversation_idNoThe conversation this result belongs to. Pass it back as the conversation_id argument on every later Well call in the same conversation.
resolved_workspaceNoThe workspace that answered, when the caller named none and the token authorizes several.
conversation_id_noteNoPresent only when the server opened a fresh lane, stating that no choice recorded earlier was read.
conversation_id_sourceNoWhere the conversation id came from: the host's own request meta, the caller's argument, or a fresh lane the server opened.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / conversation_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The conversation id returned by the previous Well result, in its meta under well/conversation_id, in its structuredContent, or in its JSON text block. Pass it back on every call in the same conversation, including a call a card makes, so the chosen workspace and the earlier answers still apply. It decides the conversation on its own: nothing the host states about the session replaces it. Omit it only on the first call of a conversation.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / conversation_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The conversation this result belongs to. Pass it back as the conversation_id argument on every later Well call in the same conversation.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / conversation_id_note
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Present only when the server opened a fresh lane, stating that no choice recorded earlier was read.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / conversation_id_source
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Where the conversation id came from: the host's own request meta, the caller's argument, or a fresh lane the server opened.",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "host_meta",
      +    "argument",
      +    "minted"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties / caller
      Removed value: -{
      -  "type": "string"
      -}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "amount",
      -  "currency",
      -  "as_of",
      -  "accounts",
      -  "scope",
      -  "excluded",
      -  "partial",
      -  "computed_by",
      -  "caller",
      -  "success"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "amount",
      +  "currency",
      +  "as_of",
      +  "accounts",
      +  "scope",
      +  "excluded",
      +  "partial",
      +  "computed_by",
      +  "success"
      +]
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint true), the description reveals significant behavioral traits: it measures nothing, derives no figure, the card draws nothing beyond total and timestamp, and all other fields return in the text result. It also enumerates refusal conditions, clarifies that 'partial' means a floor derived from excluded, and states it never indicates a cut-short read. This is far beyond the basic annotation hints.

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 long but well-structured with bold headings (REQUIRED, REFUSED, OPTIONAL) and front-loads the core purpose and the 'measures nothing' caveat. Some redundancy exists (e.g., the 'card draws nothing' point is made twice), but the length is justified by the tool's complexity and the need to enumerate validation rules.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (10 parameters, nested objects, numerous validation conditions), the description covers all essential semantic and usage aspects: parameter meanings, refusal triggers, partial semantics, workspace handling, and conversation_id usage. The presence of an output schema means return-value documentation is not needed, and the description is complete for correct invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 20%, so the description carries the full burden of parameter explanation. It thoroughly explains each parameter: negative amounts are legal, accounts must carry institution_name and masked suffix with naming rules, excluded groups are named and merged counts lose meaning, partial reflects is_floor, balance_history nulls as gaps, workspace_id selection. This fully compensates for the sparse schema descriptions.

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 states a specific action ('Put a cash position YOU computed onto the cash card') and explicitly clarifies what it does not do ('This tool measures nothing', 'never to get a cash position'). This distinguishes it from measurement or listing tools and from sibling render_* tools by focusing on caller-computed cash rendering.

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?

The description explicitly states when to call ('only after you have totalled the balances yourself') and when not to call ('never to get a cash position'). It also gives workspace-handling instructions (call directly for single-workspace tokens, pass workspace_id otherwise). It does not name alternative sibling tools explicitly, but the boundary is clear.

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.

Resources