Mintline MCP Server

top_vendors

Retrieve a ranked list of vendors sorted by total spending amount. Specify the number of vendors to return.

Instructions

Get top vendors. Get a ranked list of vendors by total spending amount.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "limit": "<limit>"
    },
    "name": "top_vendors"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	Yes	Number of vendors to return

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.1.9May 6, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / limit / default
```
Added value: +10
```
- changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
```
Previous value: -"Number of vendors to return (default 10)"New value: +"Number of vendors to return"
```
- changedInput schema / properties / limit / type
```
Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"
```
- addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "limit"
+]
```
First observedv1.1.0Feb 1, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description discloses the ranking criterion (total spending amount) and that it returns a list, but lacks details on data scope (e.g., time period, user filters) or pagination behavior. Without annotations, this is moderately transparent.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the key action and detail, with no unnecessary words.

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

Completeness3/5

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

No output schema exists, and the description does not specify output fields (e.g., vendor name, amount). While adequate for a simple tool, it could be more complete given the number of sibling tools and potential ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100% with a single parameter (limit) already described. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 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 clearly states the tool retrieves top vendors ranked by total spending amount, using a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like spending_summary or list_transactions.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit usage guidelines or alternatives provided. The purpose is clear but there is no guidance on when to use this tool over others, such as spending_summary or search tools.

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