OpenMonetis MCP

Marcar transações como pagas/recebidas

settle_transactions

Marks or unmarks transactions as settled, optionally recording settlement date, paid amount, and account. Use it to reconcile records with actual payments.

Instructions

Marca ou desmarca uma ou mais transações como liquidadas, opcionalmente informando data, valor pago e conta usada. 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": {
      "ids": "<ids>",
      "isSettled": "<isSettled>"
    },
    "name": "settle_transactions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ids`	Yes	IDs das transações a marcar/desmarcar.
`confirm`	No
`accountId`	No
`isSettled`	Yes
`settledDate`	No
`settledAmount`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.3Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation; the description adds the valuable confirmation gate, which is not encoded in annotations and is undocumented in the schema for `confirm`. It does not disclose the consequences of settling (balance recalculation, ledger effects), behavior on already-settled IDs, or partial-failure semantics across a batch.

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 operation and followed immediately by the hard prerequisite. No filler or repetition of the title.

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 bulk mutation on up to 500 records with no output schema and no annotation-level safety detail beyond destructiveHint=false, the description should explain what the caller gets back and whether partial batches succeed. The confirmation gate is a good start, but the operational consequences of calling it remain underspecified.

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?

Schema coverage is only 17%, so the description has to compensate, and it does: it maps the optional fields to meaning (data, valor pago, conta usada) and states the confirm requirement, covering all six parameters at least implicitly. It omits the batch constraint (max 500 ids) and what `confirm: false` actually does, so it falls short of full coverage.

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?

Names a specific verb pair (marca/desmarca) and resource (transações), plus the state being changed (liquidadas) and the optional metadata accepted. The dual polarity is clear because the isSettled parameter exists, though the description never says the direction is driven by that flag, leaving a small inference step.

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?

Provides one real usage rule: `confirm: true` is required for execution, which tells the agent this is a gated write. It gives no guidance on when to prefer this over siblings like create_transaction or add_invoice_payment, and no conditions for when not to use it.

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

Deploy Server