OpenMonetis MCP

Resumo da caixa de entrada

get_inbox_snapshot

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a quick inbox summary with status counts and recent pending items so you can check whether captures await review.

Instructions

Resumo rápido do inbox: contagens por status e os últimos itens pendentes. Útil para saber se há capturas aguardando revisão.

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": "get_inbox_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.3Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the result is a 'resumo rápido' with counts plus a small set of recent pending items, which usefully signals the read-only, non-exhaustive nature. It says nothing about ordering, refresh behavior, or what 'últimos' means in terms of time window.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and followed by the practical use case. No wasted wording, though it is quite terse given the un-explained parameter.

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?

For a simple read-only snapshot tool this is nearly adequate: annotations cover safety, no output schema exists so return-shape explanation would help more than usual, and the single parameter is undocumented. An agent can call it with defaults, but cannot make an informed choice about limit.

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%, and the sole parameter (limit, default 4, max 6) is never explained in the description. The word 'últimos itens pendentes' hints that the result is truncated, but the description does not clarify that limit controls how many pending items are returned. Baseline 3 for a one-parameter tool with an implicit, partial hint.

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+resource: a quick inbox summary with counts by status and the latest pending items. The purpose is clear and distinguishable from list_inbox_items or confirm_inbox_item, though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling to contrast with.

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 phrase 'Útil para saber se há capturas aguardando revisão' implies a when-to-use context (triage/checking for pending captures), but there are no explicit exclusions or pointers to alternatives such as list_inbox_items for full detail.

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

Deploy Server