tastytrade-mcp

Get transaction history

get_transactions

Retrieve transaction history for a tastytrade account, including trades, money movements, and fees. Filter by date range, symbol, or instrument type.

Instructions

Get transaction history for an account (trades, money movements, fees).

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": {
      "account_number": "<account_number>"
    },
    "name": "get_transactions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`account_number`	Yes	The account number
`start_date`	No	Earliest transaction date, YYYY-MM-DD
`end_date`	No	Latest transaction date, YYYY-MM-DD
`underlying_symbol`	No	Filter by underlying symbol
`instrument_type`	No	Filter by instrument type
`per_page`	No	Results per page (default 50)
`page_offset`	No	Page offset for pagination

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It does not mention pagination, date range handling, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only (though implied by 'Get'). The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the name.

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?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word is necessary, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the 7 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain pagination, default date ranges, ordering, or what the return data looks like. Agents need more context to use this tool effectively.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds limited extra meaning by specifying 'trades, money movements, fees', but does not elaborate on parameter syntax or usage beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'transaction history', specifying the scope as 'trades, money movements, fees'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_accounts or get_positions, which retrieve different data.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any exclusions or conditions stated. The description simply states what it does, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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

Deploy Server