Skip to main content
Glama

SafraPay MCP

by io.github.mcp-dir
OverviewAdmin

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

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already signal read-only/idempotent behavior, and the description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond that: no paid/status field exists, payments[] refers to the previous bill's payment, totalAmount is authoritative and must not be summed, transactions_basis can be estimated, and include_transactions triggers an extra full account scan. This warns the agent about pitfalls that annotations alone could not communicate.

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 with the core purpose and return fields. Every sentence adds meaningful usage or caution information; the payment-status warning and authoritative-total warning are especially valuable for correct invocation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only, idempotent batch endpoint, the description covers input, output shape, batch response, transaction linking semantics, and relevant sibling tools. It is nearly complete, but the unexplained transactions_detail parameter remains a small gap and there is no output schema to make up for it.

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?

The schema has no property descriptions, and the description compensates well for bill_ids, include_transactions, and account_id, explaining why account_id is needed and what include_transactions:true does. However, the transactions_detail parameter is not mentioned at all, leaving an unexplained parameter in the schema.

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 names an exact resource and action: returns bill-level detail for credit card bills by id, with the endpoint GET /bills/:id. It lists the concrete fields returned and distinguishes this tool from siblings like openfinance_list_credit_card_bills and openfinance_list_transactions.

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 routing guidance: use openfinance_list_credit_card_bills first to discover bill ids, prefer that list endpoint for paid status, and use openfinance_list_transactions when self-fetching transactions. It also explains when include_transactions is useful and when to expect estimated vs exact transaction linkage.

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

All SafraPay 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.

Resources