Wise MCP Server

List transfers

list_transfers

Read-onlyIdempotent

List a Wise profile's transfers from the last 90 days, newest first, and filter by status, date range, currency, or pagination to review payment activity.

Instructions

List the profile's transfers, newest first, from the last 90 days unless since says otherwise. Filter by status: incoming_payment_waiting is every payment set up and waiting to be paid.

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": "list_transfers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	How many to return, 1-100. Defaults to 20.
`since`	No	Only transfers created on or after this date, YYYY-MM-DD. Defaults to 90 days ago.
`until`	No	Only transfers created before this date, YYYY-MM-DD.
`offset`	No	Skip this many, for the next page.
`status`	No	Comma-separated statuses: incoming_payment_waiting, processing, funds_converted, outgoing_payment_sent, cancelled, funds_refunded.
`profile`	No	The Wise profile id to act for. Defaults to WISE_PROFILE_ID, else the only business profile. See list_profiles.
`oldest_first`	No	Oldest first instead of newest first.
`source_currency`	No	Only transfers paid from this currency, such as EUR.
`target_currency`	No	Only transfers received in this currency.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.2.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so safety needs no restating. The description adds behavior the annotations cannot: results are ordered newest-first by default and scoped to the trailing 90 days unless overridden. Pagination and result-size behavior are left to the schema.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and ordering, with no filler or restatement of the title. The default window and the status caveat are packed into the same sentences without losing clarity.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a nine-parameter, all-optional read tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, default time window, default ordering, and the least-obvious filter value. Pagination semantics and the profile-defaulting behavior live in the schema, which is acceptable given full coverage.

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%, so the baseline is 3, and each parameter already carries its own description. The description does add meaning for the status filter by explaining that `incoming_payment_waiting` means every payment set up and awaiting payment, and by tying `since` to the 90-day default.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the profile's transfers') plus ordering and default window, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from get_transfer or list_transfer_payments, leaving that routing to the name and sibling intuition.

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 the default 90-day window and the 'unless `since` says otherwise' override, which tells the agent how to widen the range. However, it names no alternative tools and gives no explicit when-to-use versus get_transfer (single transfer) or list_transfer_payments (payments within a transfer).

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