Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenMonetis MCP

OpenMonetis MCP

by Welington98
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Detalhar conta

get_account
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieves complete account data, including balance and period summary, by account ID to support financial review and reporting.

Instructions

Retorna os dados completos de uma conta, incluindo saldo e resumo do período.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_account"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesID da conta.
periodNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.3

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the response includes balance and a period summary, which is useful return-content context, but it says nothing about behavior on a missing/invalid id or about default period handling.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. It is efficient, though its brevity means it carries little beyond the bare purpose statement.

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?

With no output schema, the description should describe returns more concretely; it names 'saldo' and 'resumo do período' but not what the summary comprises. Combined with the undocumented 'period' parameter, the definition is adequate but leaves real gaps for a detail-retrieval tool.

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 50%: the 'id' parameter is documented in the schema, while 'period' carries only a regex pattern and no description. The description's mention of 'resumo do período' loosely ties to the period parameter but adds no format, default, or scoping meaning beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retorna os dados completos de uma conta') plus what is included (saldo and resumo do período), so the agent knows this is a single-account detail fetch. It does not distinguish itself from siblings such as get_account_cash_flow or get_person_summary, leaving the boundary implicit.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. Only the vague phrase 'dados completos' hints that this is the full-detail endpoint rather than a specialized view, which the agent must infer.

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