monarch-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_cashflow_summary

Retrieve a cashflow summary of income, expenses, savings, and savings rate for a specified date range or recent records.

Instructions

Get cashflow summary (income, expenses, savings, savings rate).

Args: limit: Number of records to retrieve (default: 100) start_date: Start date in YYYY-MM-DD format (requires end_date) end_date: End date in YYYY-MM-DD format (requires start_date)

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": "get_cashflow_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`start_date`	No
`end_date`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Mar 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden of disclosure. It does not mention any behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, side effects, or data scope beyond the params. The tool appears read-only but this is not stated.

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?

The description is brief and includes a docstring-style args section. It front-loads the purpose in the first sentence. However, it could be more structurally streamlined, e.g., moving the args explanation to a more standard format.

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?

Given the parameter count of 3 and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter details. It is complete for a simple retrieval tool, though it lacks broader context like authentication or data sources.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by adding meaning: 'limit' default is 100, 'start_date' and 'end_date' require YYYY-MM-DD format and must be used together. This clarifies parameter dependencies and format 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves a cashflow summary containing income, expenses, savings, and savings rate. The verb 'Get' and resource 'cashflow summary' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'get_cashflow' and 'get_transactions_summary'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_cashflow' or 'get_transactions_summary'. It lacks explicit context for use cases, prerequisites, or limitations.

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