YNAB MCP Server

Get transaction

get_transaction

Read-only

Retrieve a single YNAB transaction by its ID, including all split details. Use it to inspect one transaction's full breakdown within a budget.

Instructions

Get one transaction, including the parts of a split.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`transaction_id`	Yes	Transaction to get (required)

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Unique transaction identifier
`date`	Yes	Transaction date
`flag`	No	Flag as 'Name (Color)' format
`memo`	No	User-entered memo
`amount`	Yes	Amount in currency units (negative = spending, positive = income)
`cleared`	Yes	Cleared status: 'cleared', 'uncleared', or 'reconciled'
`approved`	Yes	Whether the transaction is approved
`payee_id`	No	Payee ID
`account_id`	Yes	Account ID
`payee_name`	No	Payee name
`category_id`	No	Category ID
`account_name`	No	Account name
`category_name`	No	Category name
`subtransactions`	No	The parts of a split transaction
`transfer_account_id`	No	For a transfer, the other account
`parent_transaction_id`	No	Parent transaction ID if this is a part of a split
`import_payee_name_original`	No	For an imported transaction, the payee exactly as the bank wrote it. Useful for working out the real payee and category.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one substantive behavioral detail — that split parts are included — but says nothing about missing-ID behavior or the scope of the returned record.

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, and the differentiating detail (split parts) arrives immediately. Nothing is wasted.

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?

With an output schema covering the return shape and annotations covering the read-only safety profile, the description only needs to establish scope and the split nuance, which it does. The slight gap is the absence of any error/not-found or sibling-routing context.

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% with a single required parameter, so the schema already defines transaction_id fully. The description adds no format, source, or lookup guidance beyond what the schema provides, making baseline 3 correct.

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 and resource ('Get one transaction') and the singular scope distinguishes it from the sibling list_transactions. It stops short of explicitly naming that sibling, so the differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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 'one transaction' implies lookup by ID, which implies use when you already have a transaction_id, but the description never says when to prefer this over list_transactions or what happens if the ID is unknown. Usage is inferable but not guided.

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