fiken-mcp

fiken_list_transactions

Read-only

Retrieves all company transactions with optional filters for date range and pagination to integrate accounting records.

Instructions

Returns all transactions for the company

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": "fiken_list_transactions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No
`pageSize`	No
`createdDate`	No	YYYY-MM-DD
`createdDateGe`	No
`createdDateGt`	No
`createdDateLe`	No
`createdDateLt`	No
`lastModifiedGe`	No
`lastModifiedLe`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is known. The description adds nothing about pagination, filtering, or return behavior, which is essential given the 9 optional parameters.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words, achieving high conciseness. However, it omits important context, slightly reducing its effectiveness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 9 parameters, no output schema, and siblings that offer more specialized listings, the description lacks crucial details about filtering, pagination, and scope, making it incomplete.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 11% (only 'createdDate' has a format description). The description provides no additional meaning for any of the 9 parameters, failing to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Returns' and the resource 'transactions' for the company. However, it does not distinguish from sibling 'fiken_get_transaction' which retrieves a single transaction, but the purpose is still clear.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'fiken_get_transaction' or other list tools. No mention of required context or prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server