Skip to main content
Glama
georgebashi

lunchmoney-mcp

by georgebashi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

create_manual_crypto

Add a manually tracked cryptocurrency to Lunch Money by specifying its name, symbol, and balance. Use this to record crypto holdings that are not automatically synced, such as cold wallet assets.

Instructions

Create a manually-managed crypto asset. The symbol must match one returned by get_supported_cryptocurrencies.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesUser-defined name for the manual crypto asset, e.g. 'Cold Wallet BTC'.
symbolYesCryptocurrency symbol to track, e.g. 'btc'. Must match a symbol from get_supported_cryptocurrencies.
balanceYesBalance as a numeric string with up to 18 decimal places, e.g. '0.852341920145782301'. Pass a string to avoid losing precision.
display_nameNoOptional display name. If omitted, clients may derive one from institution_name and name.
institution_nameNoOptional institution or wallet provider display name, e.g. 'Ledger'.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv3.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds the symbol-validation constraint, which is beyond the sparse annotation (idempotentHint=false). However, it doesn't reveal behaviors like duplicate handling, creation side effects, or failure modes, leaving much of the behavioral burden on the schema.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then the key constraint. No redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple create operation, the description combined with the complete schema is adequately informative. It lacks an explicit output description, but with no output schema defined, this is acceptable.

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%, so the parameters are already fully documented. The description's mention of symbols matching get_supported_cryptocurrencies is useful but also already embedded in the symbol parameter's description.

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 'Create a manually-managed crypto asset' with a specific verb and resource. The distinction from sibling tools (delete_manual_crypto, update_manual_crypto, get_all_manual_crypto) is evident from the name and phrasing.

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?

The prerequisite of matching a symbol from get_supported_cryptocurrencies gives concrete guidance on a precondition to calling this tool. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to know when to use it.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools