Skip to main content
Glama

openfinance_update_transaction_category

Corrects the category of one or more transactions (PATCH /transactions/:id). Pass items as an array of { transaction_id, category_id } — transaction_id comes from openfinance_list_transactions, category_id from openfinance_list_categories. This overrides Pluggy's automatic categorization AND teaches Pluggy: recategorizing a transaction automatically creates a Category Rule for this client (case-insensitive exact match on the transaction's data), so FUTURE similar transactions are categorized the same way — use this to fix miscategorized transactions and improve categorization accuracy going forward. Batch shape: returns { updated, results: [{ transaction_id, category, categoryId }], errors: [{ id, status, message }] } — per-item errors do not fail the whole batch.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYes

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds critical behavioral context: it overrides Pluggy's automatic categorization, teaches Pluggy by creating a rule, and defines batch error semantics (per-item errors don't fail the whole batch). This goes well beyond the structured fields.

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 dense and front-loaded with the core action, then covers usage and output. It's longer than typical but every sentence provides necessary information for correct invocation, though it could be tightened slightly without losing value.

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?

For a batch mutation tool with side effects, the description covers input format, ID sources, side-effect behavior, and batch response structure. With no output schema, this level of detail is essential and fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema has no descriptions for the nested fields, but the description fully explains the items array structure, required fields, and their provenance. It even describes the exact batch response shape, compensating entirely for the lack of schema descriptions and output schema.

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 verb ('corrects') and resource ('category of one or more transactions') and references the PATCH endpoint, clearly distinguishing it from sibling list-only tools like openfinance_list_transactions. It also notes the override and learning behavior, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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?

The description explicitly tells when to use it (fix miscategorized transactions, improve future categorization) and identifies where to get required IDs from sibling tools (openfinance_list_transactions and openfinance_list_categories). It also explains the side effect of creating a Category Rule, so the agent understands long-term implications.

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.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool targets a specific resource/action (balance, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, categories, provider status), with clear boundaries. Minor overlap exists between openfinance_list_transactions and openfinance_list_transactions_by_item, and among the multiple account-related tools, but the descriptions are detailed enough to disambiguate.

Naming Consistency4/5

Almost all tools follow an openfinance_<verb>_<noun> snake_case pattern (list_accounts, get_credit_card_bill, update_transaction_category). Minor deviations include openfinance_provider_status (noun_noun) and openfinance_list_transactions_by_item (extra preposition), but the overall convention is predictable and consistent.

Tool Count4/5

19 tools is on the heavier side but fits the broad scope of an Open Finance banking integration covering connections, accounts, transactions, credit cards, loans, investments, and provider health. Each tool appears justified; the count does not feel bloated.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full lifecycle: connection discovery/search/list/sync/disconnect/status, account and transaction retrieval, credit card bill summaries and detail, loans, investments, transaction categorization, and provider diagnostics. No critical dead ends are apparent for the stated banking data domain.