Zen Money MCP

list_reminders

Retrieve scheduled financial reminders and their statuses, optionally filtered by date range, to review upcoming planned operations.

Instructions

Показать запланированные операции и их состояния.

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_reminders"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`toDate`	No
`fromDate`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

C2.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden but discloses almost nothing: no indication of read-only safety, no pagination or result-size behavior, no mention of default date range despite two date filters, and no note that states/statuses are included in the output. Only 'показать' faintly signals a non-mutating read.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

A single short sentence with no filler, and the core intent is front-loaded. Its brevity, however, reflects under-specification rather than density of useful 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?

For a two-parameter list tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation, the description should explain the date-range filters and what a 'state' looks like. It supplies none of that, leaving the agent largely to guess.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description never mentions fromDate or toDate. The date-filtering capability is completely invisible, so the agent must infer parameter meaning from bare JSON Schema property names with no format explanation beyond the regex pattern.

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

Purpose3/5

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

"Показать запланированные операции и их состояния" gives a verb (show) and a resource (scheduled operations), but the resource is a paraphrase rather than the tool's own name (reminders), and it does not distinguish this from siblings such as list_reminder_markers or list_transactions. An agent can guess the general area but not the precise scope.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no reference to alternatives like list_reminder_markers or list_transactions, which share the 'list' namespace and would be easy to confuse. Usage is only implied by the verb 'показать'.

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