Skip to main content
Glama

ynab_create_receipt_split_transaction

Automatically allocate tax across categories when splitting a receipt into itemized transactions. Input receipt total, tax, and line items to create a YNAB split transaction.

Instructions

Create a split transaction from itemized receipt data with proportional tax allocation.

Args:

  • budget_id (string, optional): Budget UUID. Omit to use the default budget.

  • account_id (string, required): Account UUID.

  • payee_name (string, required): Store/payee name.

  • receipt_total (number, required): Total amount in dollars (positive).

  • receipt_tax (number, required): Tax amount in dollars (0 if none).

  • categories (array, required): Category groups with items. Each item needs name, amount.

  • date (string, optional): ISO date. Default: today.

  • memo (string, optional): Memo applied to the parent transaction.

  • receipt_subtotal (number, optional): Pre-tax subtotal for validation.

  • cleared (string, optional): "cleared", "uncleared", or "reconciled". Default: "uncleared".

  • approved (boolean, optional): Mark as approved. Default: false.

  • flag_color (string, optional): Transaction flag color ("red", "orange", "yellow", "green", "blue", "purple").

  • dry_run (boolean, optional): Preview subtransactions without saving. Default: false.

Use this helper when you have receipt line items and want tax allocated across categories automatically. For generic manual split transactions without receipt/tax logic, use "ynab_create_transaction" with "subtransactions".

Returns: transaction with subtransactions and receipt_summary.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNo
memoNo
clearedNo
dry_runNo
approvedNo
budget_idNo
account_idYes
categoriesYes
flag_colorNo
payee_nameYes
receipt_taxYes
receipt_totalYes
receipt_subtotalNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate write (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false) behavior. The description adds value by explaining proportional tax allocation and the dry_run parameter for preview. While it could mention that the tool modifies account balances, the provided details are sufficient for an agent to understand the behavioral traits.

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?

The description is well-structured with an initial summary, a list of parameters, and usage notes. Every sentence contributes value, though it is somewhat lengthy but not excessively so. The front-loading of the core purpose and differentiation is effective.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (13 parameters, nested objects) and the presence of an output schema (indicated by context), the description covers the essential aspects: what the tool does, parameter details, and return behavior. The mention of returns 'transaction with subtransactions and receipt_summary' provides adequate context for an agent.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The input schema has 0% coverage, but the description compensates by providing detailed explanations for all 13 parameters, including types, requirements, and default values. For complex nested objects like 'categories', it clarifies each item needs name and amount. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema structure.

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 clearly states the tool creates a split transaction from receipt data with proportional tax allocation. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'ynab_create_transaction' by explicitly mentioning receipt/tax logic and directing generic manual splits to that alternative. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool: 'Use this helper when you have receipt line items and want tax allocated across categories automatically.' It also states when not to use it by referencing the sibling tool. Parameters like budget_id are explained with defaults (omit to use default budget).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/dizzlkheinz/ynab-mcpb'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server