Skip to main content
Glama

Crefisa 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?

Even though annotations mark the operation read-only and idempotent, the description adds valuable behavioral details: Pluggy has no paid/status field, transactions may be exact or estimated depending on transactions_basis, opt-in incurs an extra full transaction scan, and the bill totalAmount is authoritative rather than a sum of transactions. No annotation contradiction exists.

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?

The description is long but dense and front-loaded: purpose comes first, then opt-in behavior, caveats, batch shape, and cross-tool alternatives. Nearly every sentence carries actionable information, and there is no filler or restating of the schema.

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?

With no output schema available, the description supplies return-value details, error-shape, field meanings, common pitfalls, and off-ramps to sibling tools. Given the tool's complexity, the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly, aside from the minor transactions_detail wording gap.

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 carry the parameter burden. It richly explains bill_ids, include_transactions, and account_id, but it never explains transactions_detail (compact/rich/raw) or how it affects the returned transactions payload. This is the only notable parameter gap.

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 names the operation: get bill-level detail for one or more credit card bills by id, with explicit response fields and an endpoint hint. It also distinguishes from the sibling list tool by directing discovery to openfinance_list_credit_card_bills and noting that list derives payment_status.

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 concrete when-to-use guidance: use openfinance_list_credit_card_bills to discover bill ids, use openfinance_list_transactions to pull transactions yourself, and prefer openfinance_list_credit_card_bills for paid status. It also explicitly warns when assumptions are wrong, such as payments[] not proving the current bill is paid.

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.