Skip to content

implementation-notes.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
93 lines (70 loc) · 4.55 KB

implementation-notes.md

File metadata and controls

93 lines (70 loc) · 4.55 KB
Raw

Implementation notes: source-conscious financial review

Audience and purpose

This repository is for accountants, bookkeepers, accounting firms, CAS teams, fractional CFOs, business owners, and developers who want to use MosoFin’s MCP connection for review and analysis of authorized business data.

The plugin is intentionally a thin client. It connects to the existing remote MosoFin MCP server, guides workspace confirmation and tool selection, and keeps the response grounded in data fetched during the current conversation. It does not bundle a financial database or copy customer records into this repository.

Current product boundary

  • Connected accounting platforms are the live financial data source.
  • MosoFin tools exposed by this plugin are read-only except for the explicit, consent-gated ability to save a proven MosoFin skill.
  • Read-only means the financial tools do not create, update, delete, post, send, pay, reconcile, or otherwise change financial records in the connected source.
  • MosoFin supports questions across deliberately selected workspaces; it does not claim a released formal consolidation, forecasting, board-pack, scheduled distribution, or write-back accounting workflow.
  • The AI assistant (Claude, Grok, ChatGPT, or another MCP client) prepares the conversation and analysis. The responsible person checks the support and owns the final judgment.

Why workspace confirmation comes first

A financial question is unsafe when the company context is implicit. The call order therefore starts with list_workspaces, asks the user to select by name, and confirms the opaque workspace handles before any datasource operation.

For a multi-client firm, separate workspaces reduce the risk that one client’s data or conclusion appears in another client’s review. For a multi-entity owner, the same pattern makes the selected scope visible before a comparison begins.

Why source discovery precedes analysis

The plugin does not assume a report or operation exists. It checks connected datasources and their allowed tool catalog, then invokes only the operation that fits the question. A missing connection, blocked tool, absent date, or ambiguous company is a reason to stop and clarify—not a reason to invent a result.

Every data-backed answer should end with a Data sources line that identifies the datasource and fetched_at value returned by the live tool call.

Permission and failure behavior

  • approval_required pauses for explicit user consent.
  • tool_policy_disabled stops the operation; the plugin must not work around it.
  • entity_required asks the user to select the displayed company.
  • a reconnect URL is presented to the user; the plugin does not claim data was retrieved while the connection is unavailable.
  • an invalid or inaccessible workspace is treated as unknown, without revealing other tenant information.

These behaviors are part of the product boundary, not incidental error handling.

Building a reusable review

A repeatable financial review should state:

  1. audience and decision supported;
  2. required workspace, company, period, basis, and source coverage;
  3. allowed read operations and calculation rules;
  4. how facts, assumptions, unknowns, and exceptions are separated;
  5. the output structure and supporting evidence;
  6. human approval and follow-up ownership; and
  7. how the workflow stops when inputs or support are missing.

Only save the workflow as a MosoFin skill after a real result exists and the user approves the proposed skill. A saved skill preserves a useful method; it does not grant new data access or authorize write actions.

Public reference assets

Examples in this repository must use synthetic data. Do not commit customer records, credentials, access tokens, exported financial reports, or screenshots containing private company information.

License and contribution method

Code and documentation in this repository are available under the MIT License; see LICENSE. Submit documentation corrections and new read-only workflow patterns through a GitHub issue or pull request. A proposed workflow should include its audience, source requirements, review checkpoints, expected output, and failure behavior, and must preserve the boundary above.