Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
deenesjakoruzh
Monobank MCP Server

Monobank MCP Server

by Aler1x
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Monobank MCP 服务器 (Node.js/TypeScript)

Node.js/TypeScript 实现 的 Monobank MCP Server（原版使用 Python 编写）。

Monobank MCP 服务器将您的 Monobank 个人账户（以及公开汇率）作为模型上下文协议 (MCP) 工具公开。

关于此版本

这是由 @nklymok 开发的原始 Python 实现的 Node.js/TypeScript 移植版。

  • 原始 Python 版本: https://github.com/nklymok/Monobank-MCP

  • 此 TypeScript 版本: 保留了相同的核心个人账户工具，并结合了 Node.js/TypeScript 生态系统的优势，此外还增加了一个无需令牌的公开汇率工具。

Related MCP server: Monobank MCP Server

功能

  • 使用官方 @modelcontextprotocol/sdk 的 TypeScript/Node.js MCP 服务器

  • MCP 工具：

    • get_client_info – 客户身份、账户和储蓄罐（需要 MONOBANK_API_TOKEN）。

    • get_statement – 指定时间窗口内的账户对账单（需要令牌）。在调用 API 之前会验证时间段；响应使用主单位金额，交易时间使用 ISO 8601 UTC 格式。

    • get_currency_rates – 来自 Monobank 的公开货币汇率 (GET /bank/currency)。无需 API 令牌。

使用方法（已发布包）

使用此 MCP 服务器最简单的方法是通过已发布的 npm 包：

  1. 在您的 MCP 配置中注册服务器

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

    仅当您使用 get_client_info 或 get_statement 时才需要设置 MONOBANK_API_TOKEN。get_currency_rates 无需此令牌即可工作。

  2. 运行您的 MCP 客户端 – 工具将根据您的配置可用。

开发

如果您想贡献代码或修改服务器：

  1. 克隆并安装依赖项

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

  2. 安装后运行服务器（prepare 会执行 npm run build）。对于个人工具，请设置 MONOBANK_API_TOKEN。

    Windows (PowerShell):

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

    Windows (命令提示符):

    set MONOBANK_API_TOKEN=your_token_here
node dist\index.js

    macOS/Linux:

    export MONOBANK_API_TOKEN=your_token_here
node dist/index.js

    或单行命令:

    MONOBANK_API_TOKEN=your_token_here node dist/index.js

  3. 热重载开发 (使用 tsx --watch):

    MONOBANK_API_TOKEN=your_token_here npm run dev

  4. 构建 (TypeScript → dist/):

    npm run build

工具参考

工具

描述

令牌

速率限制 (Monobank)

get_client_info

获取客户资料、账户和储蓄罐列表。

是

1 次请求 / 60 秒

get_statement

获取账户和期间的交易记录。参数：account_id（来自 get_client_info 或 '0' 表示默认账户）、from_timestamp（Unix 秒数）、可选的 to_timestamp（Unix 秒数；省略则表示“当前”）。从 from_timestamp 到结束（to_timestamp 或当前）的时间段必须 ≤ 31 天 + 1 小时（与 API 对齐）。金额以主单位返回；时间以 ISO 8601 UTC 格式返回。省略 id、invoiceId、counterEdrpou、counterIban。

是

1 次请求 / 60 秒

get_currency_rates

公开汇率（ISO 4217 数字货币代码）。与 Monobank GET /bank/currency 数据相同。

否

按 Monobank 公开 API 规定

API 令牌

个人工具需要 Monobank 个人 API 令牌。请参阅官方文档：https://api.monobank.ua/index.html

环境变量

名称

必需

描述

MONOBANK_API_TOKEN

仅用于 get_client_info 和 get_statement

您来自 https://api.monobank.ua/index.html 的个人 Monobank API 令牌。get_currency_rates 不使用此项。

许可证

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.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo recent community issues

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