Smart Expense Management MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

payment_summary

View spending breakdown by payment method such as UPI, Cash, or Card. Filter by year and month to analyze payment trends.

Instructions

Breakdown of spending by payment method (UPI, Cash, Card, etc.).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "payment_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	No
`month`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 14, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It implies a read-only aggregation operation, but does not disclose whether filtering by year/month is supported or what the output structure is (output schema exists but is not referenced). The description is adequate but not explicit.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. All information is front-loaded and immediately understandable.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the presence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values, but it fails to mention the time-filtering capability implied by the parameters. With many sibling tools, more context on scope and filtering would improve completeness.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema has two optional parameters (year, month) with no descriptions (0% coverage). The tool description does not mention these parameters, leaving agents unaware that the summary can be filtered by time. This is a significant gap.

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 provides a 'breakdown of spending by payment method,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling summary tools like 'expense_summary' or 'monthly_summary' by focusing on payment method aggregation, but does not explicitly exclude other filtering dimensions.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the numerous sibling summary tools (e.g., 'expense_summary,' 'monthly_summary'). The description lacks any context for selection or exclusions.

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