Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

splitwise-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

sw_get_current_user

Read-only

Get the authenticated Splitwise user's profile. Use the returned id when building custom expense splits. The compact default returns id, name (first_name + last_name joined), email and registration_status; pass view:'full' for Splitwise's…

Instructions

Get the authenticated Splitwise user's profile. Use the returned id when building custom expense splits. The compact default returns id, name (first_name + last_name joined), email and registration_status; pass view:'full' for Splitwise's raw record, which keeps first_name and last_name separate — the form sw_update_user takes.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact returns {id, name, email, registration_status, balance} per person — `name` is first_name + last_name joined, so the separate fields are on "full" only; "full" returns Splitwise's whole record.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 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"
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.4.0
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Response shape: \"compact\" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; \"full\" returns every field this server understands. compact returns {id, name, email, registration_status, balance} per person — `name` is first_name + last_name joined, so the separate fields are on \"full\" only; \"full\" returns Splitwise's whole record.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv2.1.5

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: what the default compact payload contains, that name is first_name+last_name joined, and that 'full' preserves the raw record shape. No contradiction with the read-only hint.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then the return-shape detail. Every clause carries information (splits hint, compact field list, full-form rationale), though the em-dash clause is slightly dense.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully describes both possible return shapes and the one optional enum parameter. For a zero-required-param read tool, nothing an agent needs 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.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds a rationale not in the schema: the 'full' form is what sw_update_user consumes, which tells an agent why to choose it. It largely restates the schema's own explanation of compact vs full, hence not a 5.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Get the authenticated Splitwise user's profile') that also distinguishes it from the sibling sw_get_user by scope (current/authenticated vs arbitrary user). It names sw_update_user to connect the 'full' output form to a downstream consumer, so an agent can place the tool precisely.

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?

Gives concrete downstream guidance ('use the returned id when building custom expense splits') and an explicit condition for choosing view:'full' (that's the form sw_update_user takes). It never states when NOT to use it or when to prefer sw_get_user instead, so it falls short of a 5.

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