OpenMonetis MCP

Notificações

list_notifications

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve actionable financial notifications such as upcoming invoices, exceeded budgets, and at-risk goals, with counts for unread, active, and archived items.

Instructions

Lista as notificações acionáveis do usuário, como faturas próximas do vencimento, orçamentos excedidos e metas em risco. Retorna itens, contagem de não lidas, ativas e arquivadas.

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": "list_notifications"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.3Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so safety is fully covered. The description adds the response composition — items plus unread, active and archived counts — which is genuine value given there is no output schema, but it says nothing about ordering, limits or whether archived items are filtered out of the item list.

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, no filler: the first establishes purpose with examples, the second states the return shape. Everything is front-loaded and each sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the definition covers purpose, scope and return composition adequately. It stops short of pagination/size limits and ordering, which matter for a feed that could grow.

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 schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate and the baseline applies. The description correctly implies no filtering arguments are needed to obtain the full actionable set.

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 (list actionable notifications) and scopes it with concrete examples — upcoming invoices, exceeded budgets, at-risk goals — so an agent knows this is a derived alert feed, not a raw entity list. It does not name a differentiating sibling, but the 'acionáveis' framing separates it from the plain list_* tools.

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 word 'acionáveis' implies usage (surface things needing attention rather than browsing raw records), but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement and no named alternative such as list_inbox_items or list_invoices. An agent must infer the distinction from the example categories.

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

Deploy Server