Skip to main content
Glama

99Pay MCP

by io.github.mcp-dir

openfinance_list_transactions_by_item

Read-onlyIdempotent

Consolidated cash-flow analysis for a whole bank CONNECTION over a period, in ONE call. Resolves the connection's accounts internally and fans out their transactions, so you do NOT need to call openfinance_list_accounts first nor carry account_id uuids between calls. Pass item (connector_id, connector_name or item_id) to target one bank, or OMIT it to analyze ALL linked banks at once. from/to are ISO dates (YYYY-MM-DD). Default granularity:'monthly' returns a COMPACT summary (no raw rows): total entradas, saídas, saldo_liquido, monthly evolution (por_mes), and top_despesas/top_recebimentos (largest N each), plus a per-account breakdown (by_account). Use this for 'análise anual/mensal', 'fluxo de caixa', 'entradas e saídas', 'maiores gastos/recebimentos'. Set granularity:'raw' to ALSO get every consolidated transaction (heavier — only when itemized rows are needed); combine with detail:'rich' to enrich those rows with merchantInfo (cnpj/cnae/businessName/category) + extra creditCardMetadata (billId, purchaseDate, fees), or detail:'raw' for the full untouched Pluggy object per row, when the connector provides them. type filters BANK or CREDIT accounts. On a connection with many transactions the scan caps at 5000/account and flags truncated:true. May include a provider_incident block when the Open Finance provider has an OPEN incident affecting a connected bank: the totals/rows may be incomplete or wrong until the provider recovers, and reconnecting does not fix it.

Bulk support: accepts item_ids for batched execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNo
fromNo
itemNo
typeNo
top_nNo
detailNo
item_idNo
item_idsNo
granularityNo

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds critical behavioral details: truncation at 5000 transactions per account with a 'truncated' flag, potential 'provider_incident' block affecting data completeness, and the default granularity behavior. No contradictions with annotations.

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 well-structured with front-loaded key information (purpose, key features) followed by parameter details and edge cases. It is relatively long but each sentence adds value given the tool's complexity. Minor opportunity to tighten some phrasing.

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 has 9 parameters, no output schema, and supports multiple granularities and details, the description is remarkably thorough. It covers all parameter behaviors, return structure, truncation, provider incidents, and bulk support. No gaps remain for effective usage.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter: 'item' accepts connector_id/connector_name/item_id, 'from'/'to' are ISO dates, 'granularity' monthly vs raw, 'detail' compact/rich/raw, 'type' BANK or CREDIT, 'top_n' for largest N, and 'item_ids' for batch. This adds significant meaning beyond the enum values in the 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 clearly states the tool provides consolidated cash-flow analysis for a whole bank connection over a period in one call. It distinguishes itself from siblings like openfinance_list_accounts by noting it resolves accounts internally and fans out transactions, and from openfinance_list_transactions by offering aggregated monthly summaries.

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 says when to use this tool: for 'análise anual/mensal', 'fluxo de caixa', etc., and notes that you do not need to call openfinance_list_accounts first. It also mentions that omitting 'item' analyzes all linked banks. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools for specific cases.

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

All 99Pay MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, with clear separation between general server utilities (authenticate, connect, marketplace) and the openfinance_* family (get/list/search/update per domain). No two tools appear to overlap: list_transactions vs list_transactions_by_item are differentiated by granularity, and get_item_status vs provider_status by scope. The marketplace tool, while broad, is explicitly named and described, so it doesn't cause ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 20 openfinance_* tools follow a strict verb_noun snake_case pattern (list_accounts, get_account_balance, force_sync, update_transaction_category, etc.). The five general tools also use snake_case and clear names, maintaining consistency across the set. No mixing of conventions or inconsistent verb styles.

Tool Count4/5

At 25 tools, the set is on the higher end but well-justified for a platform that aggregates Open Finance data and provides a marketplace. The 20 openfinance tools cover distinct banking operations (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, sync, status, search, categories), each addressing a specific need. The 5 general tools handle authentication, connection status, and platform info. No obvious trivial or redundant tools; each earns its place.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is comprehensive for the stated domain: CRUD-like coverage across financial resources (list/get for accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments), plus state management (force_sync, disconnect, update_category) and ecosystem support (search_connectors, provider_status, marketplace). It also includes utilities like authenticate, connect, and version/bug reporting. No missing operations that would cause agent failures; the set covers connection lifecycle, data retrieval, and even API diagnostics.

Resources