avenir-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Month summary

get_monthly_summary

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a YNAB plan's monthly budget overview—income, budgeted, spent, Ready to Assign, and overspent categories—to track spending and spot overspending.

Instructions

A month at a glance: income, budgeted, spent, Ready to Assign, overspent categories.

Amounts in currency units; activity is negative for spending. Only overspent categories are listed; use get_category_balances for all of them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`month`	No	'YYYY-MM-01' or 'current'.	current
`plan_id`	Yes	YNAB plan id or 'last-used'.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`month`	Yes	First day of the month, YYYY-MM-01.
`income`	Yes	Money received in the month and assigned to Ready to Assign.
`activity`	Yes	Total spent (negative) and received in categories during the month.
`budgeted`	Yes	Total assigned to categories in the month.
`overspent`	Yes	Categories whose available balance is negative this month.
`age_of_money`	Yes	Days between receiving money and spending it, as YNAB computes it; null when unknown.
`ready_to_assign`	Yes	Money not yet given a job; negative when more was assigned than received.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds real semantics: amounts are in currency units and spending activity is returned as a negative value. It also discloses a filtering behavior (only overspent categories appear), which is not derivable from the schema or annotations.

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 tight sentences: the scope is front-loaded in the first, and the sign/unit convention plus sibling routing follow. No filler or restated boilerplate.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value structure needn't be explained, and the description correctly uses its space for things the schema cannot convey (currency sign convention, overspent-only filtering). Slightly thin on how it relates to the broader set of summary/tracking siblings, but nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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%, with 'month' documented as 'YYYY-MM-01' or 'current' and plan_id as an id or 'last-used'. The description adds no syntax, default, or format detail beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 enumerates the exact contents returned (income, budgeted, spent, Ready to Assign, overspent categories), which is far more specific than the name alone. It also names the sibling it is not (get_category_balances) so an agent can distinguish the two without opening a schema.

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 an explicit routing rule: this tool lists only overspent categories, and get_category_balances should be used when all categories are needed. That is clear context, but it offers no guidance relative to other summary-like siblings such as get_budget_vs_actual, forecast_balance, or get_category_balances-for-totals.

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

Deploy Server