Skip to main content
Glama
hs737

MCP Server for YNAB

by hs737

Transactions — List

transactions_list
Read-only

Retrieve transactions from a YNAB plan with filters for date, type, cleared status, approval, and amount. Use delta sync and pagination to keep data current without full re-reads.

Instructions

[READ] List transactions for a plan. since_date: ISO date string (e.g. '2024-01-01') — only transactions on or after this date. type: 'uncategorized' or 'unapproved' for filtered lists. Amounts are in milliunits (1000 = $1.00). Includes subtransactions for split transactions. Supports delta sync: pass last_knowledge_of_server — the server_knowledge value any earlier response returned — and YNAB sends only what changed since, which is how a long session stays current without re-reading everything. changes_since does the same across categories, months and transactions in one call.Returns a paginated envelope with items, count, has_more, and next_offset. limit defaults to 100 and cannot exceed 500. Filters applied before paging: cleared ('cleared', 'uncleared', 'reconciled'), approved (true/false), manual_only=true for transactions with no import_id (entered by hand), min_amount to keep only transactions whose absolute amount is at least that many milliunits. fields: name the columns you need and each item is projected down to them, which is where the size of a long list actually goes — fields=['id,date,amount,cleared,import_id,payee_name,memo'] is a fraction of the full row. id is always included, and an unknown name is refused with the list of valid ones. Fields that are null or empty are omitted from each item. A missing category_id therefore means the transaction is uncategorized, and a missing subtransactions list means it is not a split.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNo
limitNo
fieldsNo
offsetNo
clearedNo
plan_idNo
approvedNo
min_amountNo
since_dateNo
manual_onlyNo
last_knowledge_of_serverNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With readOnlyHint and destructiveHint already declared, the description adds substantial behavioral context: milliunits, inclusion of subtransactions, pagination envelope, delta-sync mechanism, filter-before-paging, field projection, and the semantic implications of omitted null fields. This goes well beyond what annotations cover.

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 dense but every clause carries operational information, and the core purpose is front-loaded. It is a run-on block without structural breaks, which slightly reduces readability.

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 tool with 11 optional parameters, delta sync, pagination, and an output schema, the description covers filters, paging, sync, field projection, and null-field semantics thoroughly. The main gap is not routing to the by-account/category/payee/month siblings, but the tool's own behavior is well specified.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description bears the full burden and explains nearly every parameter with concrete semantics (ISO date format, filter values, milliunits, default/max limit, field projection behavior). Offset is inferable from next_offset and plan_id from 'for a plan', so the compensation is strong.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair ('List transactions for a plan') and explicitly contrasts itself with the delta-sync sibling changes_since. It does not, however, distinguish this general list from the many transactions_list_by_* variants, so sibling differentiation is incomplete.

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?

It gives clear guidance on delta sync (pass last_knowledge_of_server to get only changes) and names changes_since as the alternative for cross-entity deltas, plus type for filtered lists. It lacks explicit when-to-use guidance versus the transactions_list_by_account/category/payee/month siblings.

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