Skip to main content
Glama
calebl

YNAB MCP Server

by calebl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Budget Summary (legacy)

ynab_budget_summary
Read-only

Get a summary of your YNAB budget for a selected month and plan, displaying income, spending, and balances.

Instructions

Former name of ynab_plan_summary.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
monthNoThe plan month in ISO format (e.g. 2016-12-01). The string 'current' can also be used to specify the current calendar month (UTC)
planIdNoThe plan ID (optional, defaults to YNAB_PLAN_ID; budgetId is a deprecated alias)
budgetIdNoDeprecated alias of planId (still accepted)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed10 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • 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 to get a summary for (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 / month / anyOf
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "default": "current",
+    "description": "The plan month in ISO format (e.g. 2016-12-01). The string 'current' can also be used to specify the current calendar month (UTC)",
+    "pattern": "^(current|\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2})$",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / month / default
      Removed value: -"current"
    • changedInput schema / properties / month / description
      Previous value: -"The budget month in ISO format (e.g. 2016-12-01). The string 'current' can also be used to specify the current calendar month (UTC)"New value: +"The plan month in ISO format (e.g. 2016-12-01). The string 'current' can also be used to specify the current calendar month (UTC)"
    • removedInput schema / properties / month / pattern
      Removed value: -"^(current|\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2})$"
    • removedInput schema / properties / month / 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

D1.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the legacy alias, which is already reflected in the title 'legacy'.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. A single deprecation note cannot replace a functional tool description.

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?

The schema and annotations provide good invocation details, but the description is missing the core purpose of the tool. An agent cannot reliably decide when to invoke this tool from the given information.

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 description coverage is 100%, and each parameter is already documented in the schema. The description contributes nothing extra to parameter understanding, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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

Purpose1/5

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

The description only says 'Former name of ynab_plan_summary'; it never states what the tool does. An agent cannot tell from this description that it summarizes a budget, month, or plan.

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?

The description names ynab_plan_summary as the current counterpart, which implies this is a legacy alias. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus its siblings or when to prefer the replacement.

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