Skip to main content
Glama
pragprogrammer

YNAB MCP Server

create_transaction

Create a new transaction in YNAB with specified account, date, amount, optional category, payee, memo, and split support.

Instructions

Create a new transaction. Future-dated transactions are not permitted (use scheduled transactions instead).

Args: plan_id: The plan ID (use list_plans to find available IDs) account_id: The account ID for this transaction date: Transaction date in YYYY-MM-DD format (must not be in the future) amount: Amount in dollars (negative for outflow, positive for inflow). e.g. -50.25 for spending $50.25 payee_id: Payee ID (use list_payees to find available IDs). For account transfers, use the target account's transfer_payee_id. payee_name: Payee name. If payee_id is null, this resolves to an existing payee or creates a new one. category_id: Category ID. Use null with subtransactions to create a split. Credit Card Payment categories are ignored. memo: Memo/note (max 500 chars) cleared: 'cleared', 'uncleared', or 'reconciled' approved: Whether the transaction is approved flag_color: 'red', 'orange', 'yellow', 'green', 'blue', 'purple', or null import_id: Unique import identifier (max 36 chars). Used for matching against imported transactions. subtransactions: For splits, an array of dicts with keys: amount (dollars, required), payee_id, payee_name, category_id, memo exclude_fields: Optional list of field names to exclude from the response. If omitted, the model's default exclude list is used (see FIELDS.md). Pass [] to return all fields. Pass a custom list to override the default.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateYes
memoNo
amountYes
clearedNouncleared
plan_idYes
approvedNo
payee_idNo
import_idNo
account_idYes
flag_colorNo
payee_nameNo
category_idNo
exclude_fieldsNo
subtransactionsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses constraints (no future dates), explains relationship between payee_id and payee_name, split behavior via subtransactions, and import_id matching. However, does not explicitly state mutation side effects, required permissions, or idempotency, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Front-loaded with key purpose and critical constraint. Parameter descriptions are structured clearly with newlines and each sentence earns its place. Despite length, it's efficiently organized and not verbose.

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?

Given the tool complexity (14 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers all necessary aspects: parameter semantics, constraints, relationships between parameters, and alternative usage. Complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully compensates by detailing each of the 14 parameters with usage context: date format, amount sign convention, payee_id for transfers, category_id for splits, subtransactions structure, and exclude_fields behavior. Adds significant value beyond the schema.

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?

Description begins with 'Create a new transaction', clearly specifying the verb and resource. It immediately distinguishes this tool from scheduled transactions for future dates, providing a clear scope. No ambiguity with sibling tools.

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?

Explicitly states when not to use this tool: future-dated transactions are not permitted, directing to scheduled transactions instead. Provides context but does not explicitly compare with other write tools like create_transactions or update_transaction, though the usage is clear for single transactions.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/pragprogrammer/mcp-ynab'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server