Skip to main content
Glama

BTGPactual MCP

by io.github.mcp-dir

openfinance_list_accounts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns accounts for a bank connection: BANK (checking/savings) and CREDIT (credit card) with balance, number, type, subtype, bankData, and creditData. Also returns bank (the brand/connector name like 'Nubank Empresas' — same shown in the dashboard UI) and connector_id. Note: each account's name is the legal entity that issues the account (e.g. 'Nu Pagamentos S.A. - Instituição de Pagamento'), which is not the same as the brand — when referring to the bank in user-facing text, use bank. OMIT item to list accounts across ALL linked banks at once — the response aggregates every connection's accounts into results, each row tagged with its own bank/connector_id/item_id (use this when the user asks for 'my accounts/cards' without naming a bank). Pass item to target a single bank (response carries bank/connector_id/item_id at the root). CREDIT (credit card) balance: its meaning is CONNECTOR-DEPENDENT — some banks report the current open-bill partial, others the full revolving/installment debt — so do NOT treat balance as 'this month's bill'. The open billing cycle is defined by creditData.balanceCloseDate (when it closes) / balanceDueDate (when it's due). For a standardized open-bill amount and total debt that mean the same across connectors, use openfinance_list_credit_card_bills (open_bill + total_pending_debt, derived from PENDING transactions); closed bills come from that same tool's results. A CREDIT row may carry creditData.usedAmount (how much of THIS card's limit the bank reports as consumed) and a balance_notice. balance_notice means balance came back 0,00 while the bank's own payload indicates an outstanding amount — some issuers never fill the card's consolidated balance field. When it is present, do NOT tell the user the card has nothing to pay: read the amount from openfinance_list_credit_card_bills instead. bankData.closingBalance and automaticallyInvestedBalance are provider-reported extras that can LAG right after a connection is first created: the bank may publish the connection as UPDATED before those derived fields converge, so they can briefly carry a stale/phantom value that a force sync (openfinance_force_sync) reconciles. The account's own balance is authoritative — treat those two as hints until they agree with it. May include a provider_incident block when the Open Finance provider has an OPEN incident affecting a bank in this response: balances and credit limits may be unreliable (incomplete or wrong, e.g. a credit limit near 1,00) even with the connection UPDATED, until the provider recovers. Do not present those values as real. May include an identity_notice when the SAME account (same number) arrives via two connections stamped with DIFFERENT owner/taxNumber: in Open Finance those fields reflect each connection's CONSENT HOLDER (e.g. a joint account consented by both holders), so dedupe by account number before summing balances and do not attribute ownership by owner/taxNumber for those accounts.

Bulk support: accepts item_ids for batched execution.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemNo
typeNo
item_idNo
item_idsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. Added
  6. Removed
  7. Added
  8. Removed
  9. Added
  10. Removed
  11. Added
  12. Removed
  13. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / item_id
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / item_ids
      Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  14. Added
  15. Removed
  16. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive; the description adds substantial behavior beyond that: CREDIT balance is connector-dependent ('do NOT treat `balance` as "this month's bill"'), `balance_notice` requires reading the amount from another tool instead of reporting zero, bankData derived fields can carry stale/phantom values after first connection, provider_incident makes balances unreliable, and identity_notice requires dedupe by account number before summing. No contradiction 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.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Nearly every sentence earns its place because each caveat prevents a real user-facing error, but the description is a dense ~500-word wall of text. Key invocation guidance (OMIT vs. pass `item`) is buried after the name-vs-brand note, and related warnings (balance semantics, balance_notice, provider_incident, identity_notice) are spread across separate long passages. The content justifies the length; the structure and front-loading do not.

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?

Given no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description is remarkably complete: it documents the return fields, the notices (balance_notice, provider_incident, identity_notice), the dedupe rule, field-lag behavior, and routes to the right sibling tools. Remaining gaps are small but real: the role of the `item_id` input parameter, whether `type` combines with `item`/`item_ids`, and the relationship between `item_id` and `item_ids` are never stated.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 0% schema coverage, the description carries full burden and compensates well for most parameters: `item` (single bank vs. aggregated-all), `type` (BANK = checking/savings, CREDIT = credit card), and `item_ids` (bulk/batched execution). However, the singular `item_id` input parameter is never explained as an input — it only appears as a response row tag — leaving the item vs. item_id distinction ambiguous.

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 opening sentence names a specific verb-operation and resource: 'Returns accounts for a bank connection: BANK (checking/savings) and CREDIT (credit card) with balance, number, type, subtype, bankData, and creditData.' It differentiates from siblings by explicitly routing credit-card bill amounts to openfinance_list_credit_card_bills, and the annotation title 'List Bank Accounts' aligns with the description. An agent can distinguish this from the 24 siblings without opening schemas.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance for each mode: 'OMIT `item` to list accounts across ALL linked banks at once... use this when the user asks for "my accounts/cards" without naming a bank. Pass `item` to target a single bank.' It also names alternatives with conditions: use openfinance_list_credit_card_bills for standardized open-bill amounts, and openfinance_force_sync to reconcile lagging fields. It even tells the agent when NOT to present values (provider_incident).

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

All BTGPactual 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The openfinance_* family is well-decomposed by resource (accounts, transactions, bills, investments, loans, connections) and by action (list, get, update, sync, disconnect), and the highly detailed descriptions make each tool's boundaries clear. A few pairs can be confused at a glance (list_accounts vs. get_account_balance, list_transactions vs. list_transactions_by_item, connect vs. toolkit_info), but the semantics are ultimately distinguishable.

Naming Consistency3/5

The openfinance_* group follows a strong and consistent verb_noun pattern (list_transactions, get_item_status, force_sync). However, the platform-level tools are a mixed bag—authenticate, connect, marketplace, toolkit_info, show_version, report_bug—so there is no single predictable naming scheme across the whole server.

Tool Count3/5

At 25 tools, the server is at the heavy/borderline boundary, though most of the surface area is genuinely needed for Open Finance reads and connection lifecycle management. Some functions overlap (list_accounts returns balances that get_account_balance also exposes), making the set feel slightly bloated and closer to a two-in-one platform (Open Finance + marketplace).

Completeness4/5

The server covers the full Open Finance discovery and connectivity lifecycle: search, reconnect, force sync, provider health, accounts, transactions, credit cards, investments, loans, and category correction. Gaps like initiating a new connection or executing financial movements are handled through connect URLs rather than direct tools, so the unavoidable dead-end is likely workable and the core read/aggregate domain is well covered.

Resources