Skip to main content
Glama

Clear 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

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. 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"
+}
  6. Added
  7. Removed
  8. First observed

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only and idempotent annotations, the description discloses critical behavior: truncation at 5000 transactions per account with a truncated flag, potential provider_incident blocks with data integrity caveats, and the heavier cost of 'raw' granularity. This substantially enriches the annotations.

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?

Though lengthy, the description is densely packed with necessary information for a complex tool. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose, uses clear formatting, and every sentence adds practical value without redundancy.

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?

The description provides a complete picture: return structure (totals, monthly evolution, top transactions, per-account breakdown), handling of provider incidents, truncation behavior, and use-case guidance. Given no output schema exists, this fully compensates and exceeds the minimum required.

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 the meaning and usage of nearly every parameter: `item` accepts various identifiers or omission for all banks, `from`/`to` are ISO dates, `granularity` controls summary vs raw rows, `detail` controls enrichment levels, `type` filters account categories, and `item_ids` enables batch execution. Only `top_n` is implied but clear from 'largest N'.

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 performs consolidated cash-flow analysis for a connection, resolving accounts internally and aggregating transactions. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly noting it does not require prior account listing calls and targets whole connections, not individual accounts.

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?

It provides explicit use cases ('análise anual/mensal', 'fluxo de caixa', etc.) and explains when to choose 'raw' granularity versus the default. It also tells users they do not need to call openfinance_list_accounts first, effectively steering them away from an alternative.

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

All Clear 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are mostly distinct, with clear descriptions differentiating them. Some overlap between openfinance_list_accounts and openfinance_get_accounts_detail, but descriptions clarify that one returns summaries and the other full details. The marketplace tool is very detailed and avoids confusion with Open Finance tools.

Naming Consistency3/5

The Open Finance tools follow a consistent openfinance_verb_noun pattern, but other tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info) do not use a prefix. This mix of conventions reduces overall consistency, though within the Open Finance subset the pattern is clear.

Tool Count4/5

24 tools is a reasonable count for a platform covering authentication, marketplace, and detailed Open Finance operations. The number is slightly high but each tool has a clear purpose and none seem redundant.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers the full lifecycle of bank connections: listing accounts, transactions, credit card bills, investments, loans, force syncing, provider status, and category management. The marketplace tool also allows extending functionality. No obvious gaps for the intended financial data domain.

Resources