py-ynab-mcp

by duganth

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Remote

get_user

Get the authenticated YNAB user's ID to identify the current user for API interactions.

Instructions

Get the authenticated YNAB user.

Returns the user ID.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Jul 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool is a read operation returning user ID but does not mention that it is safe, non-destructive, or any authentication requirements. For a simple read-only tool, this is adequate but lacks explicit safety hints.

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?

The description consists of two concise sentences with no extraneous information. Every word is necessary and front-loaded with the key action and return value.

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?

Given zero parameters and the existence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could optionally mention that the user ID is used in other API calls, but this is not essential for correct tool usage.

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?

The input schema has no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter information. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds no extra semantic value beyond what is already clear.

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 retrieves the authenticated YNAB user and returns the user ID. The verb 'get' and resource 'user' are specific, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools that operate on other entities like accounts or categories.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

While no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, the description is self-evident: use this tool to get the authenticated user's ID. The context of sibling tools (all CRUD on different resources) implicitly differentiates it, but a mention of alternatives is not necessary here.

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