ExpenseBot

share_report

Destructive

Share one existing expense report after confirmation. Default to reviewer: they can open and edit that report's Google Sheet, inspect receipts, comment, approve, or request changes, but cannot act for the owner or use accounting integrations. Use accountant only when the user explicitly asks for ongoing accounting access; it creates the established accountant relationship and broader report-management workflow.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`reportId`	Yes
`recipients`	Yes
`recipientRole`	No	Use reviewer for report-only approval. Use accountant only for explicit ongoing accountant access.	reviewer

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	Yes
`success`	Yes
`sharedWith`	Yes
`finalAnswer`	No
`recipientRole`	Yes
`responseGuidance`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 9, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "finalAnswer": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "recipientRole": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "responseGuidance": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "sharedWith": {
+      "items": {
+        "format": "email",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "success": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "success",
+    "message",
+    "sharedWith",
+    "recipientRole"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedAug 28, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / recipientRole

Added value: +{
+  "default": "reviewer",
+  "description": "Use reviewer for report-only approval. Use accountant only for explicit ongoing accountant access.",
+  "enum": [
+    "reviewer",
+    "accountant"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedAug 25, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": true,
-  "description": "Standard ExpenseBot tool result envelope. `message` is the human-readable summary the AI cites; `data` is the structured payload (totals, breakdowns, ids, etc.). On failure, `success` is false and `error` carries a code/message/hint triple.",
-  "properties": {
-    "data": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "description": "Structured payload. Shape varies per tool — common keys: total, breakdown, comparison, sampleMeta, ids, expenseId, reportId, signupUrl, results.",
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "error": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "description": "Present only when success === false.",
-      "properties": {
-        "code": {
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        "hint": {
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        "message": {
-          "type": "string"
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "message": {
-      "description": "Human-readable result text. Always present on success; prefer rendering this verbatim before any further reasoning.",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "sampleMeta": {
-      "additionalProperties": true,
-      "description": "Set when the underlying dataset was truncated. isTruncated=true means the agent saw a sample of `sampleCount` of `totalCount` rows; aggregate totals are still accurate.",
-      "properties": {
-        "isTruncated": {
-          "type": "boolean"
-        },
-        "sampleCount": {
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        "totalCount": {
-          "type": "integer"
-        }
-      },
-      "type": "object"
-    },
-    "success": {
-      "description": "False on tool errors; check before reading `data`.",
-      "type": "boolean"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null

First observedAug 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate mutating and destructive behavior, but the description adds valuable context: it specifies what the reviewer can and cannot do (open/edit the Google Sheet, comment, approve, but not act for owner or use accounting integrations) and explains that the accountant role creates a broader relationship. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 two sentences and front-loaded with the core action. It packs role behavior into a compact but readable form. No unnecessary filler, though it could be slightly more concise without losing nuance.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the main decision point (role selection) thoroughly, and an output schema exists so return values are not needed. However, it does not explicitly clarify the semantics of reportId and recipients beyond what the schema shows, and it leaves questions like whether sharing is reversible or what happens on re-share unanswered. Given the tool's mutation and destructive annotation, a bit more detail would be helpful.

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 only 33% (only recipientRole has a description). The description compensates well for recipientRole by explaining when to use each value, but it does not explicitly describe reportId or recipients beyond the context of 'sharing a report' and the email format implied by the schema. This is a partial compensation.

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?

The description clearly states the tool shares an existing expense report, which is a specific verb and resource. It differentiates the reviewer and accountant roles, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like send_report_to_accounting. The purpose is unambiguous and useful for an agent.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to use each role: default to reviewer unless the user explicitly requests ongoing accountant access. This helps the agent decide between recipientRole values, but it does not mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives like send_report_to_accounting, which is a minor gap.

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

All ExpenseBot tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.