Skip to main content
Glama
calebl

YNAB MCP Server

by calebl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List Scheduled Transactions

ynab_list_scheduled_transactions
Read-only

Retrieve all scheduled recurring transactions from your YNAB plan to review upcoming payments and manage future cash flow.

Instructions

Lists all scheduled (recurring) transactions in a plan.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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. Changed5 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 (optional, defaults to 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

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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 modest behavioral detail by saying 'all' scheduled transactions are returned, but it does not go beyond what the name and annotations already suggest, such as absence of filtering or pagination behavior.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place: 'Lists' states the action, 'scheduled (recurring)' defines the resource type, and 'in a plan' gives the scope.

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 read-only list operation, the description combined with the annotations and fully documented schema is almost sufficient. It is slightly incomplete because there is no output schema and the description does not note what fields the returned scheduled transactions will contain, but the tool name and simple nature make the return value predictable.

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%, so the schema fully documents planId and budgetId, including the default and deprecation alias. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, which fits the baseline of 3 when the schema carries the burden.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description uses a specific verb ('Lists') with a clear resource ('scheduled (recurring) transactions') and a scope ('in a plan'). The parenthetical '(recurring)' disambiguates this from regular or unapproved transaction listing siblings, so an agent can distinguish it without opening the schema.

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 phrase 'scheduled (recurring)' implies this is the tool for recurring/scheduled transactions, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of ynab_get_transactions or ynab_get_unapproved_transactions, nor does it mention any exclusions. Usage context is implied rather than stated.

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