Skip to main content
Glama

openfinance_update_transaction_category

Corrects the category of one or more transactions (PATCH /transactions/:id). Pass items as an array of { transaction_id, category_id } — transaction_id comes from openfinance_list_transactions, category_id from openfinance_list_categories. This overrides Pluggy's automatic categorization AND teaches Pluggy: recategorizing a transaction automatically creates a Category Rule for this client (case-insensitive exact match on the transaction's data), so FUTURE similar transactions are categorized the same way — use this to fix miscategorized transactions and improve categorization accuracy going forward. Batch shape: returns { updated, results: [{ transaction_id, category, categoryId }], errors: [{ id, status, message }] } — per-item errors do not fail the whole batch.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYes

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. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes beyond annotations by explaining the side effect of creating a Category Rule (teaching Pluggy) and batch error handling. Annotations only give readOnlyHint=false, but description 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?

Single well-structured paragraph starting with action, then input, effect, output. No wasted sentences; every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, description provides full response shape. Covers input, side effects, and error handling. Sufficient for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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?

Schema has 0% description coverage, so description carries full burden. It thoroughly explains the items array, required fields, where to get IDs, and the batch response shape. Adds complete parameter semantics.

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?

Description clearly states it corrects transaction categories via PATCH /transactions/:id. It specifies the input format (array of transaction_id and category_id) and the effect, distinguishing it from sibling listing tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use: to fix miscategorized transactions and improve future categorization. Provides source of IDs from list tools. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' but strong positive guidance.

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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The tools are largely distinct, especially the openfinance_* suite which follows clear resource+action patterns. A few could be confused (e.g., openfinance_list_transactions vs openfinance_list_transactions_by_item, or get_account_balance vs list_accounts) but descriptions are thorough and clarify boundaries. The non-prefixed tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace) are also distinct, though 'marketplace' is quite overloaded internally.

Naming Consistency4/5

The openfinance_* tools follow a very consistent verb_noun pattern (list, get, force_sync, update, search, provider_status). However, the platform tools are heterogeneous: authenticate, connect, report_bug, show_version are verb_noun, but 'marketplace' and 'toolkit_info' are nouns. This mix is a minor inconsistency, but overall the naming is predictable across the two clear groups.

Tool Count4/5

At 25 tools, this is on the heavy side (16-25 is considered heavy), but the breadth is justified by a comprehensive Open Finance API (19 tools) plus platform management (6 tools). Each openfinance_* tool maps to a specific endpoint or operation, so none feel redundant. Slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but appropriate for a full financial data adapter.

Completeness5/5

The Open Finance surface is remarkably complete: accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, categories, connection management (list, force_sync, status, provider_status, search connectors, disconnect), and even a categorization update. The platform side covers authentication, connectivity, marketplace operations (search/describe/invoke/install/subscribe), bug reporting, version, and toolkit info. No obvious dead ends or missing lifecycle steps.