YNAB MCP Server

Get Money Movements By Month

get_money_movements_by_month

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve category-to-category budget re-allocations for a specific month. Use it during month-end review to see how funds were shuffled between categories.

Instructions

Get money movements (category-to-category budget re-allocations) for one month. Read-only. The month-scoped view of list_money_movements; use during month-end review to see how assignments were shuffled.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`month`	Yes	Month in YYYY-MM-DD format (first of month), or 'current'
`budgetId`	No	Budget ID (uses default if not provided)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv5.4.0Sep 15, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / result / description
```
Removed value: -"Structured result returned by Get Money Movements By Month."
```

Changed1 schema field changedv5.1.1Jul 21, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "result": {
+      "description": "Structured result returned by Get Money Movements By Month."
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv2.0.0May 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior; the description adds useful context by explaining that money movements are budget re-allocations and that this is a month-scoped, read-only view. There is no contradiction, and the extra domain context goes beyond what annotations alone provide.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the action, clarifies the domain term, notes read-only behavior, and names the intended use case in two sentences. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

For a read-only, month-filtered retrieval tool, the description is complete: the annotations cover safety, the schema fully documents parameters, and an output schema exists. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 clear descriptions for both 'month' and 'budgetId'. The tool description adds the notion of month-scoping but does not provide parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema already states, which is acceptable but not additive.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Get money movements') and immediately defines the domain term as 'category-to-category budget re-allocations.' It also distinguishes this tool from the sibling list_money_movements by explicitly framing it as the 'month-scoped view,' so an agent can clearly identify what this tool does.

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 clearly indicates when to use this tool ('during month-end review') and ties it to the broader list_money_movements tool, implying the monthly scoping as the deciding factor. It could be stronger by explicitly saying when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for correct selection among siblings.

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