Skip to main content
Glama
Jtewen

You Need A Budget (YNAB) MCP

by Jtewen

list-payees

Retrieve all payees for a specified YNAB budget to locate payee IDs or identify duplicate entries requiring consolidation.

Instructions

List all payees for a given budget. Good for finding payee IDs or identifying messy payee data that needs to be merged.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
budget_idNoThe ID of the budget. If not provided, the default budget will be used.

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for the 'list-payees' tool: parses arguments, fetches payees from YNAB client, formats and returns the list as text content.
    elif name == "list-payees":
        args = ListPayeesInput.model_validate(arguments or {})
        budget_id = await _get_budget_id(args.model_dump())
        payees = await ynab_client.get_payees(budget_id=budget_id)
    
        if not payees:
            return [types.TextContent(type="text", text="No payees found for this budget.")]
    
        payee_list = "\n".join(f"- {p.name} (ID: {p.id})" for p in payees)
        return [
            types.TextContent(
                type="text",
                text=f"Here are the payees for budget {budget_id}:\n{payee_list}",
            )
        ]
  • Registration of the 'list-payees' tool in the list_tools handler, including name, description, and input schema reference.
    types.Tool(
        name="list-payees",
        description="List all payees for a given budget. Good for finding payee IDs or identifying messy payee data that needs to be merged.",
        inputSchema=ListPayeesInput.model_json_schema(),
    ),
  • Pydantic model defining the input schema for 'list-payees' tool, inheriting from BudgetIdInput (optional budget_id).
    class ListPayeesInput(BudgetIdInput):
        pass
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the tool lists payees and its utility, but it does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, if it requires specific permissions, rate limits, or what the output format looks like. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand 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.

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded, consisting of two concise sentences that directly convey the tool's purpose and utility without any wasted words. Every sentence earns its place by adding value.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not cover behavioral aspects like safety, permissions, or output format, which are crucial for a tool that lists data. The description focuses on utility but misses key contextual details needed for full understanding.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'budget_id' parameter well-documented. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining parameter interactions or constraints. According to the rules, with high schema coverage, the baseline is 3 even with no param info in the description.

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 with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('payees for a given budget'), and it explains the utility ('finding payee IDs or identifying messy payee data that needs to be merged'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list-accounts' or 'list-transactions', which would require a 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 implies usage by stating it's 'good for finding payee IDs or identifying messy payee data that needs to be merged,' which suggests when to use it. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'manage-payees' for editing, so it falls short of a higher score.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Jtewen/ynab-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server