OpenMonetis MCP

Criar meta

create_goal

Creates a financial goal with a target amount and date, using manual progress or a linked account balance to track advancement. Requires confirmation before execution.

Instructions

Cria uma meta financeira. Use trackingType: "manual" com currentAmount, ou trackingType: "account" com accountId para acompanhar o saldo de uma conta. Exige confirm: true para executar.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "targetAmount": "<targetAmount>",
      "targetDate": "<targetDate>",
      "trackingType": "<trackingType>"
    },
    "name": "create_goal"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`confirm`	No
`accountId`	No
`targetDate`	Yes
`targetAmount`	Yes
`trackingType`	Yes
`currentAmount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.3Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations only declare the mutation profile (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false); the description adds two things they do not carry: a mandatory confirm=true gate before execution and the conditional coupling of trackingType with accountId/currentAmount. It does not disclose what is returned or any side effects, keeping it out of 5 territory.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and then the mode-specific rules and the confirmation requirement. No redundant restatement of the tool name or filler.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the two non-obvious behaviors an agent would otherwise get wrong: the confirm requirement and the trackingType pairing. Missing details such as whether targetDate must be in the future or what the response contains are minor.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description has to compensate, and it does explain the enum semantics and the trackingType/accountId/currentAmount dependency plus the confirm gate. However, the other four parameters (name, targetAmount, targetDate, accountId format) get no added meaning beyond their names and raw JSON Schema patterns.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource ("Cria uma meta financeira"), which separates it from siblings like create_budget or create_transaction. It does not explicitly compare itself to the nearest alternative (create_budget), so it stops short of 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?

It gives concrete conditional usage guidance for the two trackingType modes, but says nothing about when to create a goal versus a budget or other container. The when-to-use guidance is implied by the trackingType explanation rather than spelled out against alternatives.

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

Deploy Server