Smart Expense Management MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

monthly_summary

Generate a full monthly expense report with totals, breakdown by category (with percentages), payment method, and top merchant for a given year and month.

Instructions

Full monthly report: total, by category (with %), by payment method, top merchant. Example: year=2026, month=7

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": {
      "year": "<year>",
      "month": "<month>"
    },
    "name": "monthly_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	Yes
`month`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description must bear the full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or any side effects. It only lists output components, leaving behavioral traits unspecified.

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 sentences, zero wasted words. The first sentence states the output contents concisely, and the second provides a helpful example. Every part earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists but is not shown; the description outlines the report's contents adequately. However, given the complexity of monthly summaries and the presence of many sibling tools, the description could benefit from noting prerequisite data availability or linking to related tools.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema has 0% description coverage (only types are given), but the description provides a concrete example (year=2026, month=7) which adds semantic meaning beyond bare types. This clarifies expected formats and usage, making up for the schema deficiency.

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 it produces a 'Full monthly report' and lists the components (total, by category with %, by payment method, top merchant), which differentiates it from siblings like budget_summary, event_summary, or yearly_summary.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it's for monthly reporting but does not mention situations where yearly_summary or budget_summary would be more appropriate, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites.

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