Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
deenesjakoruzh
Monobank MCP Server

Monobank MCP Server

by Aler1x
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Monobank MCP 서버 (Node.js/TypeScript)

파이썬으로 작성된 Monobank MCP Server의 Node.js/TypeScript 구현체입니다.

Monobank MCP 서버는 귀하의 Monobank 개인 계정(및 공개 환율)을 Model Context Protocol(MCP) 도구로 노출합니다.

이 버전에 대하여

이 버전은 @nklymok의 원본 파이썬 구현을 Node.js/TypeScript로 포팅한 것입니다.

  • 원본 파이썬 버전: https://github.com/nklymok/Monobank-MCP

  • 본 TypeScript 버전: Node.js/TypeScript 생태계의 이점을 활용하여 동일한 핵심 개인 계정 도구를 유지하며, 토큰이 필요 없는 공개 환율 도구를 추가했습니다.

Related MCP server: Monobank MCP Server

기능

  • 공식 @modelcontextprotocol/sdk를 사용하는 TypeScript/Node.js MCP 서버

  • MCP 도구:

    • get_client_info – 고객 식별 정보, 계좌 및 저금통(jars) 정보 ( MONOBANK_API_TOKEN 필요).

    • get_statement – 특정 기간의 계좌 거래 내역 (토큰 필요). API 호출 전 기간을 검증하며, 응답은 주요 단위의 금액과 ISO 8601 UTC 시간 형식의 거래 시간을 사용합니다.

    • get_currency_rates – Monobank에서 제공하는 공개 환율 (GET /bank/currency). API 토큰 불필요.

사용법 (배포된 패키지)

이 MCP 서버를 사용하는 가장 쉬운 방법은 배포된 npm 패키지를 이용하는 것입니다:

  1. MCP 설정에 서버 등록

    {
  "mcpServers": {
    "monobank-mcp": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@alerix/monobank-mcp"],
      "env": {
        "MONOBANK_API_TOKEN": "your_token_here"
      }
    }
  }
}

    get_client_info 또는 **get_statement**를 사용하는 경우에만 MONOBANK_API_TOKEN을 설정하세요. **get_currency_rates**는 토큰 없이 작동합니다.

  2. MCP 클라이언트 실행 – 설정에 따라 도구를 사용할 수 있게 됩니다.

개발

서버에 기여하거나 수정하려면 다음 단계를 따르세요:

  1. 복제 및 의존성 설치

    git clone https://github.com/aler1x/monobank-mcp.git
cd monobank-mcp
npm install

  2. 서버 실행 (설치 후 prepare가 npm run build를 실행함). 개인 도구를 사용하려면 MONOBANK_API_TOKEN을 설정하세요.

    Windows (PowerShell):

    $env:MONOBANK_API_TOKEN="your_token_here"
node dist/index.js

    Windows (명령 프롬프트):

    set MONOBANK_API_TOKEN=your_token_here
node dist\index.js

    macOS/Linux:

    export MONOBANK_API_TOKEN=your_token_here
node dist/index.js

    또는 한 줄로 실행:

    MONOBANK_API_TOKEN=your_token_here node dist/index.js

  3. 핫 리로드를 사용한 개발 (tsx --watch 사용):

    MONOBANK_API_TOKEN=your_token_here npm run dev

  4. 빌드 (TypeScript → dist/):

    npm run build

도구 참조

도구

설명

토큰

속도 제한 (Monobank)

get_client_info

고객 프로필, 계좌 및 저금통 목록을 가져옵니다.

예

1회 요청 / 60초

get_statement

계좌 및 기간에 대한 거래 내역을 조회합니다. 매개변수: account_id (get_client_info에서 가져오거나 기본값으로 '0' 사용), from_timestamp (Unix 초 단위), 선택 사항 to_timestamp (Unix 초 단위; 생략 시 "현재"). from_timestamp부터 끝(to_timestamp 또는 현재)까지의 기간은 31일 + 1시간 이하여야 합니다(API 기준). 금액은 주요 단위로 반환되며, 시간은 ISO 8601 UTC 형식입니다. id, invoiceId, counterEdrpou, counterIban은 생략됩니다.

예

1회 요청 / 60초

get_currency_rates

공개 환율 (ISO 4217 숫자 통화 코드). Monobank GET /bank/currency와 동일한 데이터입니다.

아니오

Monobank 공개 API 기준

API 토큰

개인 도구를 사용하려면 Monobank 개인 API 토큰이 필요합니다. 공식 문서를 참조하세요: https://api.monobank.ua/index.html

환경 변수

이름

필수 여부

설명

MONOBANK_API_TOKEN

get_client_info 및 get_statement 사용 시 필수

https://api.monobank.ua/index.html에서 발급받은 개인 Monobank API 토큰입니다. **get_currency_rates**에서는 사용되지 않습니다.

라이선스

MIT

Available Tools

2 tools
get_client_infoA

Get client information from Monobank API. This tool retrieves information about the client, their accounts, and jars. It requires a Monobank API token with the necessary permissions.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No parameters

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the authentication requirement (API token with permissions) which is valuable context, but doesn't describe what information is returned, whether there are rate limits, error conditions, or other behavioral traits. It adequately covers the basic operation but lacks detail about 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is appropriately concise with two sentences that each add value. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second adds important context about authentication requirements. There's no wasted text, though it could be slightly more structured.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given that this is a read operation with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides adequate but minimal information. It covers the purpose and authentication requirements, but doesn't describe what specific information is returned or the format of the response. For a tool that retrieves client information, more detail about the return data would be helpful.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already fully documents the parameter situation. The description doesn't need to add parameter information, and it appropriately doesn't discuss parameters. The baseline for 0 parameters with full schema coverage is 4.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get client information from Monobank API' with specific resources mentioned (client, accounts, jars). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_statement' by focusing on client metadata rather than transaction data. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with the sibling, so it's not a perfect 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description provides some usage context by mentioning the required API token and permissions, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for retrieving client metadata but doesn't provide guidance about when not to use it or what the sibling tool 'get_statement' is for.

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

get_statementA

Get account statement for a given period. Rate limit: 1 request per 60 seconds. Max period: 31 days + 1 hour. Rules: 1. Fetch from default account (account_id = '0') unless another account is specified. 2. Amounts are converted from the smallest currency unit (e.g., kopiyka, cent) to the main unit and returned as decimals. 3. Transaction timestamps ('time') are converted from Unix timestamps to ISO 8601 datetime strings (UTC). 4. Fields 'id', 'invoiceId', 'counterEdrpou', and 'counterIban' are omitted from the returned results.

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
account_idYesAccount identifier from the list of accounts, or '0' for default
from_timestampYesStart of the statement period (Unix timestamp)
to_timestampYesEnd of the statement period (Unix timestamp)

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes rate limits ('1 request per 60 seconds'), constraints ('Max period: 31 days + 1 hour'), data transformation rules (currency conversion, timestamp formatting), and output filtering (omitted fields), providing comprehensive 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?

The description is efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement followed by rate limits, constraints, and specific rules in a numbered list format. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse and understand.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does an excellent job covering behavioral aspects, constraints, and data transformations. However, it doesn't explicitly describe the return format or structure of the statement data, which would be helpful given the lack of output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds some context about default account behavior ('account_id = '0' unless another is specified') and timestamp usage, but doesn't provide significant additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema offers.

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 states the specific action ('Get account statement') and resource ('for a given period'), distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'get_client_info' which presumably retrieves different information. It provides concrete details about what the tool does beyond just the name.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage by specifying a period requirement and default account behavior, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. It offers some context but lacks explicit guidance on tool selection.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 2 tool updates
    • First observedget_client_info
    • First observedget_statement
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Scored across 2 tools

Disambiguation5/5

The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: get_client_info retrieves client metadata, accounts, and jars, while get_statement fetches transaction data for a specific period. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these functions.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun naming pattern (get_client_info, get_statement) with identical verb style and snake_case formatting, making them predictable and easy to understand.

Tool Count2/5

With only two tools, the server feels severely under-scoped for a banking API. Key operations like creating transactions, managing accounts, or updating client details are missing, limiting its utility for comprehensive financial tasks.

Completeness2/5

The toolset is highly incomplete for a banking domain. It only supports read operations (get_client_info, get_statement) with no ability to perform writes (e.g., transfers, payments), updates, or deletions, leaving significant gaps in typical banking workflows.

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • Monobank MCP Server

    akutishevsky
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    B
    maintenance
    Enables integration with Monobank API to check currency exchange rates, view account balances, and retrieve transaction statements through natural language queries.
    3
    85 npm
    11
    MIT

  • Monobank MCP Server

    nklymok
    F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Exposes Monobank personal account data through MCP tools, allowing users to fetch client info, accounts, and jars. It also enables retrieving account statements for specific time periods.
    -

  • Mono-MCP

    clar1k
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    An MCP server that enables AI assistants to retrieve and format Monobank account statements and transactions by date range.
    2 npm
    5
    MIT

  • Monarch Money MCP Server

    mjstramel
    A
    license
    C
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Enables interaction with Monarch Money data via MCP tools for accounts, budgets, and transactions.
    6
    97 npm
    4
    MIT