Skip to main content
Glama
diblaze

bokio-mcp

bokio_reconcile_bank

Read-only

Matches bank statement rows to ledger lines by exact amount within a date tolerance and returns matched pairs, unmatched items, duplicate suspects, and totals.

Instructions

Match bank statement rows against one ledger account by exact amount within toleranceDays, reading the SIE export itself; rows in date order each take the earliest unmatched ledger line within toleranceDays, each ledger line once. Returns matched pairs, unmatched rows on both sides, suspected duplicate ledger lines and totals, where difference = ledger minus bank. Amounts in ledger sign: debit positive, credit negative.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rowsYesBank statement rows; amounts in kronor with at most two decimals, outflow negative.
accountNoLedger account to match; default 1930 (bank).
companyIdNoBokio company id. Defaults to BOKIO_COMPANY_ID if omitted.
toleranceDaysNoMax days between a bank row and its ledger line; default 3.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYes
fromYes
accountYes
matchedYes
bankTotalYes
differenceYes
ledgerTotalYes
unmatchedBankYes
unmatchedLedgerYes
suspectedDuplicatesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / account / description
      Added value: +"Ledger account to match; default 1930 (bank)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / rows / description
      Added value: +"Bank statement rows; amounts in kronor with at most two decimals, outflow negative."
    • addedInput schema / properties / toleranceDays / description
      Added value: +"Max days between a bank row and its ledger line; default 3."
  2. Addedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, yet the description goes well beyond them: greedy earliest-match algorithm, ledger-line-used-once constraint, output composition (matched pairs, unmatched both sides, suspected duplicates, totals), and the difference = ledger minus bank sign convention. This is rich behavioral context an agent could not infer from structured fields.

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 with the matching semantics first, then outputs and sign convention. Slightly run-on across two long sentences, but every clause carries substantive information for a nontrivial algorithm.

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 matching tool with an output schema and annotations covering safety, the description supplies everything needed to call and interpret it: algorithm order, tolerances, output structure, and sign conventions. Little is left ambiguous.

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 meaning by explaining how toleranceDays governs matching ('earliest unmatched ledger line within toleranceDays') rather than just restating the field, plus the ledger-sign convention for amounts. It still doesn't elaborate account/companyId defaults beyond the schema.

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: matching bank statement rows against a ledger account. The mechanism ('reading the SIE export itself') and scope are clear, letting an agent distinguish it from siblings like bokio_list_bank_payments or bokio_find_duplicates.

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 matching workflow and toleranceDays behavior are described, implying when the tool applies, but no explicit 'use this instead of X' routing or prerequisite context is given relative to siblings such as bokio_account_ledger or bokio_find_duplicates.

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