Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

splitwise-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

sw_get_user

Read-only

Get another Splitwise user's profile by id. Same shape as sw_get_current_user: the compact default merges first_name/last_name into name, and view:'full' keeps them separate.

Instructions

Get another Splitwise user's profile by id. Same shape as sw_get_current_user: the compact default merges first_name/last_name into name, and view:'full' keeps them separate.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesUser ID
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. Changed1 schema field changedv2.4.0
    • 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

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context about the compact view merging first_name/last_name into name, which is beyond the annotations, but omits auth requirements, rate limits, or error behavior.

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 action and then the shape detail. Efficient overall, though the name-merging detail partially duplicates the schema's `view` description.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by describing the return shape of both view modes, which is the key thing an agent needs. Auth/permission behavior for reading another user's profile is the remaining gap.

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%; both `id` and `view` are fully documented in the schema, including the compact-vs-full field lists. The description's note on the merged name field largely restates what the `view` schema description already says, so it adds little beyond the 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?

States a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Get another Splitwise user's profile by id'. The word 'another' immediately distinguishes it from the sibling sw_get_current_user, so an agent can route without opening either 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?

Usage is clearly implied by the 'another user's profile by id' framing, which contrasts with sw_get_current_user, and it references the sibling for shape comparison. However, it never explicitly states when to prefer it over sw_get_current_user or what happens with an invalid/foreign id, so no true exclusion guidance.

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