Zen Money MCP

update_category

Modify an existing category's name, parent, and settings like required status, income/outcome visibility, and budget flags. Provide the category ID to apply updates.

Instructions

Изменить название, родителя и настройки категории.

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": "update_category"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`title`	No
`parent`	No
`required`	No
`showIncome`	No
`showOutcome`	No
`budgetIncome`	No
`budgetOutcome`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 1, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With zero annotations, the description carries the full burden, yet it never says whether this is a partial or full replace, what happens to fields omitted from the call, whether changes are reversible, or what permissions are needed. For a mutation tool this is a substantial disclosure gap.

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 lean sentence, front-loading the verb and fields, but at 8 parameters and 0% schema coverage this brevity reads as under-specification rather than economy.

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?

A mutation tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions needs considerably more than one sentence about names and a parent. An agent cannot reliably construct the settings booleans from what is given.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% across 8 parameters, and the description only surfaces title, parent, and a vague 'настройки' that may or may not cover showIncome/showOutcome/budgetIncome/budgetOutcome or the ambiguous 'required' boolean. Most parameter meaning is undocumented in both places.

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?

States a specific verb ('Изменить') plus the resource ('категории') and the fields affected (name, parent, settings), which cleanly separates it from create_category, delete_category, and hide_category. The catch-all word 'настройки' leaves part of the scope fuzzy, but the operation itself is unmistakable.

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 when-to-use context, no prerequisites (does the category need to exist, must it be non-archived?), and no mention of the sibling hide_category that also alters category state. The agent must infer the routing decision entirely.

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