Skip to main content
Glama
jamiew

Monarch Money MCP Server

Update Transaction Splits

update_transaction_splits
Idempotent

Replace or remove all splits on a transaction by providing a complete set of new split legs. Leg amounts must sum to the transaction total.

Instructions

Create, replace, or remove the splits on a transaction.

This is a full replacement: the splits you pass become the transaction's complete set of split legs, replacing any that exist. Pass an empty list to remove all splits and restore the transaction to a single un-split entry.

Args: transaction_id: ID of the transaction to split (required) splits: The complete set of split legs. Each leg has: - amount (required): Leg amount, using the parent's sign convention (expenses negative, income positive). All leg amounts MUST sum to the parent transaction's amount or Monarch rejects the update. - category_id (optional): Category for this leg - merchant_name (optional): Merchant display name for this leg; defaults to the parent merchant when omitted - notes (optional): Per-leg memo Pass an empty list to delete all existing splits.

Example: Split a -100.00 transaction into groceries and household: transaction_id="txn_123" splits=[ {"amount": -70.00, "category_id": "cat_groceries", "notes": "Food"}, {"amount": -30.00, "category_id": "cat_household"}, ]

Returns: The transaction id, whether it now has splits, the resulting split legs, and a human-readable summary message.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
splitsYes
transaction_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
splitsYes
messageYes
transaction_idYes
has_split_transactionsYes
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds rich behavioral context: full replacement behavior, amount summing constraint, sign convention, default merchant, and return structure. No contradictions.

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 a clear opening, bullet-style argument list, example, and return info. It is appropriately sized for the complexity; each sentence adds value. Slightly verbose but not wasteful.

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 two parameters, no nested objects, and an output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, parameter details, constraints, example, and return values. Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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%, but the description fully documents both parameters: transaction_id (required) and splits (complete set with amount required, sign convention, optional fields). An example clarifies usage. This compensates fully for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool creates, replaces, or removes splits on a transaction. It specifies the verb (create/replace/remove) and resource (splits). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like update_transaction or get_transaction_splits, though the purpose is unambiguous.

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 description explains when to use the tool (to replace splits or remove them with an empty list) and provides detailed argument semantics. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or alternatives (e.g., use get_transaction_splits to read), but the sibling list gives context.

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/jamiew/monarch-mcp'

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