Skip to main content
Glama

Méliuz MCP

by io.github.mcp-dir

openfinance_get_account_balance

Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the latest available balance per account id (GET /accounts/:id/balance). This is the freshest balance the provider can serve, but it is a SNAPSHOT anchored to the connection's last upstream sync: the updateDateTime/updatedAt in each row is that sync instant, NOT a to-the-second live read. If a movement that just happened is not reflected yet, or the balance disagrees with the sum of openfinance_list_transactions, run openfinance_force_sync to pull fresh data and then re-read. Pass account_ids as an array (1–50). CREDIT accounts may return Pluggy BALANCE_FETCH_ERROR (provider could not fetch it) or BALANCE_CONSENT_ERROR (the institution refused it because the consent lacks the balance permission — reconnecting the bank restores it) — those rows include a structured warning instead of throwing. When the financial institution is temporarily unavailable upstream (5xx) or the connector is not Open Finance, the row DEGRADES to the last-synced balance with realtime: false, updatedAt and a warning instead of an error. Response shape: { results: [...], errors: [{ id, status, message }] }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
account_idsYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. First observed

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations by disclosing snapshot semantics, the meaning of updateDateTime/updatedAt, credit-account error modes (BALANCE_FETCH_ERROR, BALANCE_CONSENT_ERROR), structured warnings, degraded rows with realtime: false, and the response shape with errors. This gives the agent a thorough model of the tool's behavior.

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?

Although lengthy, the description is densely packed with non-redundant information: purpose, freshness caveat, retry guidance, error modes, degradation behavior, and response format. Each sentence earns its place and the information is ordered from the core semantics to edge cases.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers everything needed for correct invocation: input format, limits, error handling, fallback behavior, and response structure. There are no critical gaps for an agent deciding to call it.

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?

The schema only defines account_ids as an array of strings with no description. The tool description compensates fully by stating it should be passed as an array, restricting it to 1–50 items, and referencing account-level behavior. For a single, self-explanatory parameter, this is sufficient semantic guidance.

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 opens with a clear, specific statement: 'Returns the latest available balance per account id (GET /accounts/:id/balance).' It names the exact resource, the HTTP endpoint, and the granularity, making it easy to distinguish from list-oriented sibling tools.

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 usage context: it clarifies the balance is a sync-anchored snapshot, not a live read, and instructs the agent to run openfinance_force_sync and then re-read when data may be stale or inconsistent with openfinance_list_transactions. This provides a clear decision rule versus alternatives.

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

All Méliuz 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

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct operation or data type (accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, etc.) with no ambiguity. Even closely related tools like openfinance_list_transactions and openfinance_list_transactions_by_item are clearly differentiated by scope and output format.

Naming Consistency3/5

The majority of tools follow the 'openfinance_' prefix for banking operations, but utility tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info) break this pattern, creating an inconsistent mix. However, the convention is still readable and the utilities are clearly distinct.

Tool Count4/5

25 tools is on the high side but well-justified by the breadth of Open Finance data types (accounts, transactions, credit cards, bills, loans, investments) and supporting operations (sync, status, search, updates). A few tools could potentially be merged, but overall the number is reasonable for the domain.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core Open Finance workflows: listing, reading details, syncing, updating categories, and checking provider status. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool to create or delete accounts/transactions), but these are external constraints. The set enables most user-facing financial queries and actions.

Resources