Zovo Group Expenses

Show ledger balances and settle-up

show_expense_ledger_results

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the organizer asks for the balances, who owes whom, or the settle-up payments of a shared expense ledger made with create_expense_ledger. Takes the private organizer link and returns each person's paid, share and balance, the settle-up list and recent expenses. Does not change the ledger. Do not use without the organizer link.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "manage_link": "<manage_link>"
    },
    "name": "show_expense_ledger_results"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`manage_link`	Yes	The private organizer link returned when the ledger was created, e.g. https://group-expenses.zovo.one/m/AbC.../XyZ...

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rule`	Yes
`ended`	Yes
`title`	Yes
`total`	Yes
`closed`	Yes
`people`	Yes
`recent`	Yes
`changes`	No
`currency`	Yes
`settle_up`	Yes
`expires_at`	Yes
`manage_url`	Yes
`public_url`	Yes
`minor_digits`	Yes
`people_count`	No
`recent_count`	No
`expense_count`	Yes
`number_format`	No
`payment_count`	Yes
`settle_up_zeroes_all`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the description's 'does not change the ledger' is largely redundant. What it does add is the privacy constraint that the link is the private organizer link, which shapes how the agent should handle and reuse it.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, zero padding, and the usage trigger is front-loaded ahead of the input requirement and the read-only reassurance.

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 one-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage and an output schema, the description supplies the trigger, the required input, the nature of the link, and the no-mutation guarantee. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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?

The single parameter has 100% schema description coverage including an example format, so the schema already carries the syntax burden. The description only adds the qualifier that the link is private/organizer-scoped, which is the correct baseline for a fully documented parameter.

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 names a specific resource (the balances, who-owes-whom and settle-up payments of a shared expense ledger) and ties its provenance explicitly to create_expense_ledger. An agent can distinguish this read tool from add_ledger_expenses, update_expense_ledger and create_expense_ledger without opening any schema.

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?

It gives clear trigger conditions (the organizer asking for balances, debts, or settle-up) and an explicit exclusion ('Do not use without the organizer link'). It does not name sibling tools as alternatives, but the siblings' verbs are already mutually exclusive, so the omission is minor.

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

All Zovo Group Expenses 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.

Resources

Need Help?