Zen Money MCP

delete_transaction

Marks a financial transaction as deleted in Zen Money by its ID, removing it from active records.

Instructions

Пометить операцию удалённой в Дзен-мани. Изменит финансовую запись.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "delete_transaction"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description does add real behavioral value: it reveals that this is a soft delete (mark as deleted) rather than a hard purge, and that it mutates the financial record. It omits whether the operation is reversible, idempotent, or permission-gated, which matters for a destructive-style tool with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences with no filler, and the soft-delete semantics are front-loaded. Very little is wasted, though the second sentence largely restates the mutation implied by the first.

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?

A single-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema needs to carry reversibility, permission, and effect details itself. It conveys the core effect (soft delete) but leaves the agent guessing about the aftermath and the id's origin.

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?

One required parameter with 0% schema description coverage. The description alludes to the target via 'операцию', implying id is the transaction identifier, but it never states format, source, or whether it is a local or sync-level ID.

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+resource: mark a transaction as deleted in ZenMoney. That distinguishes the intent from update_transaction and delete_category, though it never names a sibling explicitly or explains when to prefer one over the other.

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 on when to use this instead of update_transaction, or what happens if the transaction is already deleted. The only hints are the tool name and the word 'удалённой'.

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