Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MoneyMatter

by io.github.letehaha
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_net_worth_drivers

Read-only

Explain what moved net worth, period by period, in the base currency: savings (income, expenses, net), investment growth (price effect, dividends, fees and taxes, per portfolio) and the holdings and cash values at the end of the period. A degraded field lists securities or currencies that could not be priced.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>",
      "granularity": "<granularity>"
    },
    "name": "get_net_worth_drivers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesPeriod end (YYYY-MM-DD, inclusive)
fromYesPeriod start (YYYY-MM-DD, inclusive)
granularityYesPeriod length: monthly, quarterly or yearly
portfolioIdsNoScope the investment part to these portfolios. Savings stay user-wide. Unknown ids are dropped.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety needs no restating. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: results are normalized to base currency, and a "degraded" field flags securities or currencies that could not be priced, warning the agent that output may be incomplete. It does not describe pagination or response shape size, so not a 5.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler, and the core purpose plus scope (base currency, period-by-period) is front-loaded. The enumeration of growth components is dense but each element carries information the agent cannot get from the schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description must convey return structure, and it does: savings breakdown, per-portfolio price effect/dividends/fees and taxes, end-of-period holdings and cash, plus the degraded-data caveat. Minor gaps remain (behavior when portfolioIds is omitted, ordering), but the definition is sufficient to call the tool confidently.

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 from/to/granularity/portfolioIds are already documented, including the note that savings stay user-wide and unknown ids are dropped. The description only echoes the concepts (base currency, period-by-period granularity) without adding syntax or defaults, 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?

States a specific verb and resource: "Explain what moved net worth, period by period, in the base currency," then enumerates the breakdown (savings, investment growth components, end-of-period holdings/cash). This is far from a restatement of the name. It never names the sibling it must be distinguished from (get_net_worth_history), so it stops short of a 5.

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 framing ("explain what moved") implies an attribution/analysis use case rather than a plain time series, which is implicit guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or named alternative such as get_net_worth_history or get_cumulative_stats, so the agent must infer the choice.

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

All MoneyMatter 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