Skip to main content
Glama

Caixa Econômica Federal MCP

openfinance_get_credit_card_bill

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns bill-level detail for one or more credit card bills by id (GET /bills/:id): dueDate, billClosingDate (when the cycle closed — the boundary that defines which purchases belong to this bill), totalAmount, financeCharges and payments[] (id, paymentDate, amount, valueType, paymentMode). ITEMIZED PURCHASES (OPT-IN): the bank's bill payload has no transactions in it — they live on the card ACCOUNT. Pass include_transactions:true (plus account_id of the credit card, since the bill itself carries no account reference) and each row also gets transactions[], transactions_count, transactions_sum and reconciles_with_total, already matched to that bill. Always check transactions_basis: bill_id = exact (the bank tagged each transaction with this bill — the normal case for CLOSED bills), date_window = ESTIMATE (confidence:'low', window echoed in transactions_window) used when the connector tags no billId or the bill is still open (PENDING lines get no billId until the cycle closes), unavailable = no link possible. Opt-in because it costs an extra full transaction scan of the account. Whatever the basis, the bill's own totalAmount is authoritative — do NOT rebuild it by summing transactions. Without the opt-in the response carries a transactions_hint; you can also fetch them yourself via openfinance_list_transactions with the credit card account_id and a from/to range ending at billClosingDate. Pass bill_ids as an array — use openfinance_list_credit_card_bills first to discover ids. { results, errors } batch shape. NOTE: Pluggy does NOT return a paid/status field. In Brazilian Open Finance, payments[] reflects payments registered during THIS bill's billing cycle — typically the payment of the PREVIOUS bill (do NOT assume this bill was paid just because payments[] is non-empty). To check paid status, prefer openfinance_list_credit_card_bills which derives payment_status via cross-bill match.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bill_idsYes
account_idNo
transactions_detailNo
include_transactionsNo

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / account_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_transactions
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / transactions_detail
      Added value: +{
      +  "enum": [
      +    "compact",
      +    "rich",
      +    "raw"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  4. Added
  5. Removed
  6. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Substantially enriches beyond annotations: reveals that the bill payload lacks transactions, requires account_id for the opt-in, explains the transactions_basis logic including low-confidence estimates for open bills, warns that payments[] reflects previous bill payments (not this bill), and notes Pluggy does not return a paid status. Annotations only declare read-only and idempotent, so this adds critical behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

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

Front-loaded with the core purpose and return fields, then logically expands to opt-in behavior, transactions_basis, and payment semantics. Every sentence adds specific guidance without repetition, making the length justified by the tool's complexity.

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 tool with 4 parameters, a batch response, and intricate transaction-matching semantics, the description covers the full calling pattern, expected output shape, caveats (open bills, payments misinterpretation), and interaction with sibling tools. The only minor omission is transactions_detail, but overall it is exceptionally complete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It thoroughly explains bill_ids (array of ids), account_id (needed for include_transactions), and include_transactions (opt-in, extra scan). However, transactions_detail (enum compact/rich/raw) is not mentioned, leaving that parameter's semantics unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('bill-level detail for one or more credit card bills by id') and explicitly names the endpoint (GET /bills/:id). Clearly differentiates from sibling openfinance_list_credit_card_bills by requiring ids discovered from that list.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: instructs to call openfinance_list_credit_card_bills first to discover ids, explains when to use include_transactions (opt-in, extra scan), and names openfinance_list_transactions as an alternative for fetching transactions. Also details the transactions_basis modes (bill_id, date_window, unavailable) and when each applies.

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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, especially with the openfinance_ prefix grouping banking operations. However, pairs like openfinance_list_accounts vs openfinance_get_accounts_detail and openfinance_get_credit_card_bill vs openfinance_list_credit_card_bills could cause minor confusion, though descriptions help.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tools consistently use snake_case with a clear verb_noun pattern. Open finance tools all start with openfinance_, and utility tools use simple verbs like authenticate, connect, report_bug. No mixing of conventions.

Tool Count3/5

At 24 tools, the count is on the higher side of the borderline range. The server combines platform management (6 tools) and banking operations (18 tools), which justifies the number, but it feels slightly heavy for a single server.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers all major banking operations (accounts, transactions, credit cards, investments, loans) and includes essential maintenance tools (sync, status, disconnect, search connectors). Platform management is also comprehensive with authentication, marketplace operations, and diagnostics.