Skip to main content
Glama

Banco BRB MCP

by io.github.mcp-dir

openfinance_update_transaction_category

Corrects the category of one or more transactions (PATCH /transactions/:id). Pass items as an array of { transaction_id, category_id } — transaction_id comes from openfinance_list_transactions, category_id from openfinance_list_categories. This overrides Pluggy's automatic categorization AND teaches Pluggy: recategorizing a transaction automatically creates a Category Rule for this client (case-insensitive exact match on the transaction's data), so FUTURE similar transactions are categorized the same way — use this to fix miscategorized transactions and improve categorization accuracy going forward. Batch shape: returns { updated, results: [{ transaction_id, category, categoryId }], errors: [{ id, status, message }] } — per-item errors do not fail the whole batch.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. Added
  6. Removed
  7. Added
  8. Removed
  9. Added
  10. Removed
  11. Added
  12. Removed
  13. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses significant behavioral details beyond annotations: it overrides automatic categorization and creates a Category Rule for future similar transactions. It also explains batch error handling ('per-item errors do not fail the whole batch'). Annotations only indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, which are consistent.

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 a single paragraph that is information-dense but not overly verbose. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly restructured for readability. It front-loads the core action.

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's complexity (batch mutation with side effects and error handling) and no output schema, the description covers the return format, error behavior, and the non-obvious rule creation side effect. It is complete for an AI agent to correctly invoke.

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?

The input schema has no descriptions (0% coverage). The description compensates fully by explaining the items array structure, required fields (transaction_id, category_id), and where to obtain them from sibling tools.

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 states 'Corrects the category of one or more transactions (PATCH /transactions/:id)', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings as the only tool for updating transaction categories.

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 clearly tells how to use the tool by specifying the source of transaction_id and category_id from sibling tools. It explains the effect of creating Category Rules, guiding when to use. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but no sibling performs the same function.

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

All Banco BRB MCP 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most openfinance_* tools map cleanly to distinct resources and actions, and the list/get split is readable. The main risk is openfinance_list_transactions vs openfinance_list_transactions_by_item, which both return transactions and could be confused; openfinance_get_item_status vs openfinance_provider_status also sound similar, though descriptions clarify them.

Naming Consistency4/5

The openfinance_* family follows a consistent openfinance_<verb>_<noun> pattern, and platform tools mostly use simple verb_noun names. Deviations include openfinance_list_transactions_by_item, which breaks the noun pattern, and the non-prefixed platform tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace) mixing in a second naming category.

Tool Count3/5

At 25 tools, this is at the high end of reasonable scope. The open finance data surface is genuinely broad, so most tools earn their place, but the marketplace/platform tools effectively add a second unrelated domain and push the set toward heavy.

Completeness4/5

The open finance lifecycle is well covered: connection search, sync, status, disconnect, accounts, balances, transactions, credit card bills, loans, investments, and category correction. Minor gaps exist (no single-transaction fetch, no connection update beyond force_sync), but core agent workflows do not hit dead ends.

Resources