YNAB MCP Server

List Budgets

list_budgets

Read-onlyIdempotent

List all YNAB budgets to retrieve budget IDs for use in other operations. Optionally include account details for each budget.

Instructions

List all budgets. Use a budget ID from the results in other tools, or omit budgetId to use the last-used budget.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`includeAccounts`	No	If true, include each budget's account list in the response

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 List Budgets."
```

Changed3 schema fields changedv5.1.1Jul 21, 2026

addedInput schema / $schema

Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

addedInput schema / properties / includeAccounts

Added value: +{
+  "description": "If true, include each budget's account list in the response",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

changedOutput schema / (root)

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

First observedv2.0.0May 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) fully cover the safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the schema and annotations; it doesn't mention pagination, ordering, or other side effects. The mention of 'last-used budget' implies state but is irrelevant given budgetId is not a parameter.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short (two sentences), but the second sentence contains inaccurate and unnecessary information about budgetId. While brevity is good, the inclusion of a non-existent parameter makes the structure less helpful and could cause the agent to attempt invalid calls.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no required fields) and has an output schema, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, the misleading budgetId reference creates a gap in understanding—an agent cannot reliably know that the tool does not accept budgetId. This makes the description incomplete and potentially harmful.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The description references a 'budgetId' parameter that does not exist in the input schema, which actively misleads the agent. For the actual parameter includeAccounts, the schema already provides a complete description, so the description adds no value. The false budgetId reference is a serious flaw, lowering the score significantly.

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 core purpose is clear: 'List all budgets' specifies the verb and resource. It distinguishes from get_budget by implying a collection. However, the second sentence introduces a budgetId parameter that is not in the schema, which muddies the purpose and could confuse an agent about the tool's scope.

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?

The description gives usage guidance about using a budget ID from results or omitting budgetId for last-used budget, but the input schema only defines includeAccounts and has no budgetId parameter. This is misleading and does not help an agent decide when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_budget. No explicit when-to-use or exclusions are provided.

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