Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mmex-mcp

mmex-mcp

by PatricioRios
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

mmex_transactions_list

Retrieve all transactions from a Money Manager EX database. Provide the database path and optional encryption key to access your financial records.

Instructions

List all transactions in the MMEX database.

    Args:
        db_path: Path to the .mmb database file. Optional if MMEX_DB_PATH env var is set.
        db_key: Encryption key for SQLCipher databases. Optional if MMEX_DB_KEY env var is set.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "mmex_transactions_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
db_pathNo
db_keyNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description only says 'List all transactions'. Does not mention read-only nature, output format, pagination, or any side effects. For a read operation, more transparency about what is returned would help.

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?

Concise and front-loaded with the purpose. The Args section is clearly separated. Every sentence adds information. Could be slightly more streamlined, but no wasted words.

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 richness of sibling tools (create, delete, get, etc.), the description lacks context on how this list tool fits in. No mention of scope, ordering, or relationship to other transaction tools. An agent might need more context to decide when to use this over others.

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 description explains the meaning of db_path and db_key, including optionality via environment variables. This adds value beyond the schema, which only has types and defaults. Schema coverage is 0% (no param descriptions in schema), so description compensates well.

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?

Clearly states 'List all transactions' with a specific verb and resource. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling transaction tools like mmex_transactions_get or mmex_transactions_list (though this is the list tool). It could mention that it lists all transactions without filtering.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools exist for specific operations, but the description doesn't indicate that this is the comprehensive list tool without filters or prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools