Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

splitwise-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

sw_delete_group

Destructive

Soft-delete a Splitwise group after user confirmation. Requires group ID; returns a preview and confirm token for approval before deletion.

Instructions

Soft-delete a Splitwise group. Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview and a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesGroup ID to delete
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.2.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Must be true to proceed. Without this, the tool returns a preview.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv3.0.0
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. First observedv2.1.5

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds significant behavioral detail beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explaining the two-step confirmation mechanism: the client-support path and the fallback token flow. It transparently states that the first call returns a preview and confirmToken, and that a repeat call proceeds only with that token. This is exactly the kind of extra context an agent needs to avoid unintended deletions.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and then explains the confirmation behavior. Every clause earns its place, with no redundant phrases or filler. It is concise without sacrificing necessary detail.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a deletion tool with a two-step confirmation flow and no output schema, the description covers the critical interaction pattern, including the return of a preview and confirmToken. It does not explicitly state the post-deletion state (e.g., whether the group is hidden or available via undelete), but 'soft-delete' implies this, and the existence of sw_undelete_group provides additional context. The reference to MCP_CONFIRM_MODE is an external dependency but is acceptable.

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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning for the 'id' parameter, and for 'confirmToken' it largely reiterates what the schema already explains in detail. The only added value is the pointer to MCP_CONFIRM_MODE, which slightly enhances understanding but does not compensate for a high baseline.

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 clearly states the action ('Soft-delete a Splitwise group') with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like sw_create_group or sw_update_group by indicating deletion semantics, and the 'soft' qualifier implies reversibility, setting it apart from a permanent delete.

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 explains the confirmation flow, which is crucial for correct usage, and references MCP_CONFIRM_MODE for context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like sw_undelete_group (for reversal) or when not to use it, leaving some inference to the agent.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools