ExpenseTracker
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
| logging | {} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| extensions | {
"io.modelcontextprotocol/ui": {}
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| add_expenseC | Add a new expense entry to the database. |
| list_expensesA | List expense entries within an inclusive date range. |
| summarizeA | Summarize expenses by category within an inclusive date range. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| categories |
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: adding an entry, listing entries, and summarizing entries. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
The naming follows a verb_noun pattern with add_expense and list_expenses, but summarize breaks the pattern by omitting the noun. This is a minor inconsistency that does not harm usability.
Three tools is well-scoped for a simple expense tracking server. Each tool serves a core function, and the count feels neither bloated nor thin.
The server supports creating and reading expenses, but lacks update and delete operations. While summarizing adds value, the missing CRUD capabilities represent a notable gap in the tool surface.