Skip to main content
Glama

PagBank 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

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations: the balance is a snapshot tied to the last upstream sync, not a live read; errors become structured warnings in specific cases; rows degrade with 'realtime: false' when the institution is unavailable. This fully clarifies the tool's edge-case 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?

The description is dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, staleness caveat, recovery path, error modes, degradation behavior, and response shape. It front-loads the core function and then progressively layers necessary caveats without repetition.

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 there is no output schema and only one parameter, the description is complete: it documents the response shape, error structure, warning behavior, staleness semantics, and the refresh route. An agent has enough information to call this tool correctly and interpret its results.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by stating that account_ids must be passed as an array and limited to 1–50 items. It could additionally mention where valid IDs come from, but the semantic meaning of the parameter is clear enough.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Returns the latest available balance per account id (GET /accounts/:id/balance)'. It clearly distinguishes what this tool does from transaction-listing or sync siblings, making selection unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use the tool and when to escalate: if balances are stale or disagree with openfinance_list_transactions, it instructs the agent to run openfinance_force_sync and re-read. It also explains how CREDIT-account consent errors and upstream unavailability degrade behavior instead of throwing.

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

All PagBank 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 openfinance_* tool targets a distinct resource (account, transaction, bill, loan, investment) with a clear action (get/list/update/force_sync). The administrative tools (connect, authenticate, report_bug) are clearly separate. No two tools appear to perform the same function.

Naming Consistency4/5

The openfinance_* tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_account_balance, list_transactions, update_transaction_category). Minor deviations like openfinance_provider_status (lacks a verb) and openfinance_force_sync (verb phrase) slightly break the pattern, but the overall convention is predictable.

Tool Count4/5

25 tools is on the higher end but appropriate for a comprehensive Open Finance server covering accounts, transactions, bills, loans, investments, connections, and administration. Each tool has a distinct purpose and none feel redundant.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface is complete for the domain: it covers connection management (connect/disconnect/force sync/status), account and transaction queries, credit card bills, loans, investments, and transaction categorization, plus admin utilities. No obvious gaps that would block typical workflows.

Resources