Skip to main content
Glama
calebl

YNAB MCP Server

by calebl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Approve Transaction

ynab_approve_transaction
Idempotent

Mark a YNAB transaction as approved using its transaction ID. Optionally specify a plan or approval state; defaults to the configured plan.

Instructions

Approves an existing transaction in your YNAB plan.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
planIdNoThe plan ID (optional, defaults to YNAB_PLAN_ID; budgetId is a deprecated alias)
approvedNoWhether the transaction should be marked as approved
budgetIdNoDeprecated alias of planId (still accepted)
transactionIdYesThe id of the transaction to approve

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / approved / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "default": true,
+    "description": "Whether the transaction should be marked as approved",
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / approved / default
      Removed value: -true
    • removedInput schema / properties / approved / type
      Removed value: -"boolean"
    • addedInput schema / properties / budgetId / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "description": "Deprecated alias of planId (still accepted)",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / budgetId / description
      Previous value: -"The id of the budget containing the transaction (optional, defaults to the budget set in the YNAB_BUDGET_ID environment variable)"New value: +"Deprecated alias of planId (still accepted)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / budgetId / type
      Removed value: -"string"
    • addedInput schema / properties / planId
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "description": "The plan ID (optional, defaults to YNAB_PLAN_ID; budgetId is a deprecated alias)",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "description": "The plan ID (optional, defaults to YNAB_PLAN_ID; budgetId is a deprecated alias)"
+}
  2. Addedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already provide the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), and the description consistently identifies the core operation as approving an existing transaction. It adds little beyond that effect, such as noting that setting 'approved' to false would unapprove, but there is no contradiction with the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action and resource with no filler or repetition of the title. Every word earns its place, and the structure is appropriately sized for a simple mutation tool.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a simple one-transaction approval tool with strong annotations and fully described parameters, the description provides enough basic context to invoke the tool correctly. It does not mention return values or selection guidance against the bulk-approve sibling, but those are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The input schema covers all 4 parameters with 100% description coverage, including the required transactionId, the default and deprecated alias for planId, and the approved boolean. Since the schema already documents each parameter, the description does not need to compensate.

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?

The description states a specific action verb ('Approves') and resource ('existing transaction in your YNAB plan'), making it clear this is an approval mutation rather than a creation, deletion, or listing tool. It does not explicitly name or distinguish the sibling ynab_bulk_approve_transactions, relying on the singular phrasing to signal one-record scope.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies the tool is for approving an existing transaction, but it offers no explicit guidance about when not to use it or when to prefer alternatives such as ynab_bulk_approve_transactions or ynab_update_transaction. There are no clear exclusions or conditions beyond the word 'existing'.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools