Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

OurFamilyWizard MCP

by chrischall

ofw_create_expense

Destructive

Log a new expense in OurFamilyWizard with title, amount, date, category, payer, and children; optionally attach a receipt PDF or make it private. Requires confirmation before writing.

Instructions

Log a new expense in OurFamilyWizard using the current web-app expense contract. Required fields are title, amount, purchaseDate, categoryId, payerId (the parent who owes), and at least one child user id. Supports one previously-uploaded receipt PDF and private entries. privateExpense=true creates an expense visible only to you; false/default creates the normal shared expense. receiptFileId should come from ofw_upload_expense_pdf. A shared expense is a money claim that appears in the ledger in front of the co-parent immediately, and this server cannot delete it. If the request fails without a definitive answer the result is EXPENSE_UNCONFIRMED: the expense may already exist, so do NOT retry until ofw_list_expenses shows it did not land. Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call performs NO write and returns a preview of exactly what would happen plus a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesExpense title/name shown in the OFW expense log
amountYesFull expense amount before OFW applies the category split
payerIdYesOFW userId of the parent who owes/reimburses this expense
childrenYesOne or more OFW child userIds associated with the expense
categoryIdYesOFW expense category id (for example General is commonly id 1; use the id from OFW, not the category display name)
descriptionNoOptional supporting description/details for the expense
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.
purchaseDateYesDate the expense was incurred, YYYY-MM-DD
receiptFileIdNoSingle OFW My Files fileId to attach as the receipt, normally returned by ofw_upload_expense_pdf
privateExpenseNotrue = visible only to you; false/default = shared with co-parent

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed12 schema fields changedv2.20.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / amount / description
      Previous value: -"Expense amount"New value: +"Full expense amount before OFW applies the category split"
    • addedInput schema / properties / amount / exclusiveMinimum
      Added value: +0
    • addedInput schema / properties / categoryId
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "OFW expense category id (for example General is commonly id 1; use the id from OFW, not the category display name)",
      +  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
      +  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
      +  "type": "integer"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / children
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "One or more OFW child userIds associated with the expense",
      +  "items": {
      +    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
      +    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
      +    "type": "integer"
      +  },
      +  "minItems": 1,
      +  "type": "array"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / properties / description / description
      Previous value: -"Expense description"New value: +"Optional supporting description/details for the expense"
    • addedInput schema / properties / description / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / payerId
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "OFW userId of the parent who owes/reimburses this expense",
      +  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
      +  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
      +  "type": "integer"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / privateExpense
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "true = visible only to you; false/default = shared with co-parent",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / purchaseDate
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Date the expense was incurred, YYYY-MM-DD",
      +  "pattern": "^\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}$",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / receiptFileId
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Single OFW My Files fileId to attach as the receipt, normally returned by ofw_upload_expense_pdf",
      +  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
      +  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
      +  "type": "integer"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / title
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Expense title/name shown in the OFW expense log",
      +  "minLength": 1,
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "amount",
      -  "description"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "title",
      +  "amount",
      +  "purchaseDate",
      +  "categoryId",
      +  "payerId",
      +  "children"
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv2.19.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv2.17.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  4. First observedv2.8.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the expense appears in the co-parent's ledger immediately, this server cannot delete it, the EXPENSE_UNCONFIRMED partial-failure state, and the confirmation-preview-with-confirmToken protocol. This is exactly the behavioral disclosure a mutation tool needs.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Dense and front-loaded, leading with the action and required fields before the safety/confirmation caveats. Every sentence is load-bearing, though the run-on confirmation paragraph is somewhat heavy and could be split for readability.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 10-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers required fields, receipt dependency, visibility semantics, irreversible ledger effects, partial-failure handling, and the confirmation protocol. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds cross-field meaning: payerId is characterized as 'the parent who owes', children requires at least one id, receiptFileId should originate from ofw_upload_expense_pdf, and privateExpense's true-vs-default effect is restated with the shared-expense consequence. More than mere repetition.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Log a new expense in OurFamilyWizard') and scopes it to the 'current web-app expense contract', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like ofw_update_expense and ofw_list_expenses. An agent knows exactly what this tool produces 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly names required fields, routes receipt attachment through ofw_upload_expense_pdf, and gives a precise when-not-to-retry rule (after EXPENSE_UNCONFIRMED, wait for ofw_list_expenses). It also documents the two-step confirmation flow and its fallback, leaving little to inference.

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