Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
OpenMonetis MCP

OpenMonetis MCP

by Welington98
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Listar contas a pagar

list_bills
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve monthly accounts payable with total open balance, overdue count, source accounts, and per-person item splits, due dates, and statuses; use full detail for complete records.

Instructions

Lista as contas a pagar de um mês com total em aberto, quantidade de vencidas, contas de origem e itens (com rateio por pessoa, vencimento e status). Os itens vêm em versão compacta por padrão; use detail: "full" para o objeto completo.

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": {
      "period": "<period>"
    },
    "name": "list_bills"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
detailNocompact devolve os itens essenciais; full devolve o objeto completo da API.compact
periodYesMês de referência no formato YYYY-MM.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.3

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and closed-world scope, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the shape of the response (totals, overdue counts, source accounts, item-level split/due date/status) and the default compact projection, which is behavior an agent could not infer from the schema or annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and period scope, then the detail-mode caveat. Every clause carries information about the return payload or the parameter switch; nothing is redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining results and does so by naming the aggregated totals and item fields, which is sufficient for a two-parameter read tool. It is silent on ordering, volume limits, or whether a month can be empty, but those are minor for this complexity level.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both `period` (YYYY-MM) and `detail` (compact vs full) are already fully documented in the schema. The description restates the compact-by-default behavior and the purpose of `detail: "full"` but adds no format or edge-case detail beyond it — the baseline 3 for a fully documented schema applies.

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 ("Lista as contas a pagar de um mês") and enumerates the payload the caller gets back: open total, overdue count, source accounts, and items with per-person split, due date, and status. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the many sibling list_* tools (e.g. list_invoices), so it is clear but not sibling-differentiated.

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?

Usage is implied by the period-scoped framing, and the description gives a concrete switch instruction for `detail: "full"`. It never states when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as list_invoices or list_installments, nor any exclusions 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