Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Beeswax Shares MCP Server

Beeswax Shares MCP Server

by steamau
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

List member statements

list_member_statements
Read-only

Retrieve each SMSF member's statement for a financial year—opening and closing balances, contributions, earnings, payments—and flag missing statements that raise return gap G4.

Instructions

List each member's statement for a financial year — the figures behind the SMSF return's member sections and item 16 W (total member closing balances). Includes every active member, with exists:false for members that have no statement yet (missing_statements lists their fund_member_id; any missing statement raises return gap G4). Each row carries the member name, opening balance, every contribution label, allocated earnings, rollovers, benefit payments, contributions tax, phase balances, tax-free/taxable and preservation components, and the closing balance with its basis: "computed" (rolled forward: opening + contributions + earnings + rollovers in − rollovers out − payments − contributions tax) or "entered" (trustee's figure; computed_closing_balance and closing_balance_difference show how far it is from the roll-forward). AUD.

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": {
      "fund_id": "<fund_id>",
      "financial_year": "<financial_year>"
    },
    "name": "list_member_statements"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fund_idYesFund ID (discover via whoami or list_funds)
financial_yearYesFinancial year — the label "2023-24" or its numeric id (from list_financial_years)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.8.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries real weight and delivers: it discloses that all active members are returned with exists:false when no statement exists, that missing statements raise return gap G4, and that closing balances come with a computed vs entered basis plus a difference field. The roll-forward formula is even spelled out. It stops short of describing ordering or how the fields are formatted, but the behavioral coverage is well above the annotation bar.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the purpose and the return context, and the long field enumeration is doing work since there is no output schema. It is dense and reads as one long run-on, which costs a point, but there is little wasted wording.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the row shape, the closing-balance bases, the reconciliation delta fields, and the gap behavior. For a two-parameter read tool this leaves nothing an agent would need missing.

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 coverage is 100% — both fund_id and financial_year are documented with discovery hints (whoami/list_funds, list_financial_years). The description adds nothing about parameter interpretation, so this lands on the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List each member's statement for a financial year") and anchors it to a concrete domain outcome (the SMSF return's member sections and item 16 W). This distinguishes it from nearby siblings like list_statement_balances, list_balance_items, and update_member_statement.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage context is implied through its role in the return (member sections, item 16 W, G4 gap), which tells the agent why it exists. But it never explicitly says when to choose it over list_statement_balances or update_member_statement, and gives no prerequisites or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools