Skip to main content
Glama

Bankstatemently

by io.github.bankstatemently

Get Credit Balance (processing quota)

get_credits
Read-only

Your remaining Bankstatemently credits — the processing quota, NOT credit/debit transactions. Use for: how many credits do I have, remaining pages, plan limits, quota, how many pages can I upload. 1 credit = 1 page of bank statement processing. Also reports your plan's operational limits (max pages per upload, max upload size, daily spend cap) so you can size a multi-file batch correctly before starting it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
planYes
limitYes
planIdYes
balanceYes
summaryYes
creditsExpireAtYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedOutput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / plan
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "dailySpendCap": {
+      "anyOf": [
+        {
+          "type": "number"
+        },
+        {
+          "type": "null"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    "maxPagesPerUpload": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "maxUploadSizeMb": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "maxPagesPerUpload",
+    "maxUploadSizeMb",
+    "dailySpendCap"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "balance",
-  "limit",
-  "planId",
-  "creditsExpireAt",
-  "summary"
-]New value: +[
+  "balance",
+  "limit",
+  "planId",
+  "creditsExpireAt",
+  "plan",
+  "summary"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by disclosing that the tool also reports operational limits like max pages per upload and daily spend cap, which goes beyond a simple balance read.

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 slightly long but front-loaded with the core message and then organized into use cases, a definition, and additional output details. Every sentence contributes useful information, though some redundancy exists between 'remaining pages', 'quota', and 'processing quota'.

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?

For a zero-parameter read-only tool with an output schema and annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it reports, and when to use it. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema imposes no burden on the description. The description adds meaningful semantic detail by explaining what 'credits' means in terms of pages, which helps the agent interpret the output even without parameters.

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 explicitly identifies the resource as remaining Bankstatemently credits / processing quota and distinguishes it from credit/debit transactions. The mapping '1 credit = 1 page' makes the tool's purpose concrete and unambiguous.

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?

The description provides explicit use cases ('how many credits do I have, remaining pages, plan limits, quota') and a clear exclusion ('NOT credit/debit transactions'). It stops short of naming an alternative sibling tool, but the use-case guidance is strong enough for an agent to know when to invoke this tool.

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

All Bankstatemently toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Core tools are cleanly separated by resource: statements, transactions, transfers, credits, and benchmark all have dedicated entry points. The five analytics tools (aggregate, group_by, compare, time_series, top_n) share metric/filter language, but their distinct output shapes and careful descriptions prevent major confusion, with only group_by vs. time_series/top_n occasionally overlapping.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a clear snake_case verb_noun pattern such as convert_statement, list_transactions, rate_statement, and dismiss_statement. The analytics tools (aggregate, compare, group_by, time_series, top_n) break that pattern, but they are still recognizable, consistently styled, and form a meaningful cluster.

Tool Count4/5

At 16 tools, this is slightly above the typical 3-15 well-scoped range, but the server covers a broad workflow: upload, conversion, retrieval, categorization, analytics, transfer matching, rating, credits, and benchmarking. Each tool maps to a distinct capability, so the count feels justified rather than bloated.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the full statement lifecycle from upload and conversion through retrieval, categorization, analysis, rating, and dismissal, plus useful side capabilities like credits and benchmark evaluation. Minor gaps exist—no permanent deletion and no way to manually edit category mappings—but dismiss_statement and categorize_statement provide adequate workarounds.

Resources