Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

splitwise-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

sw_list_expenses

Read-only

List or search Splitwise expenses by group, friend, or date range. Retrieve transaction details to track spending and manage balances.

Instructions

List or search Splitwise expenses. All filters are optional. Use group_id to filter by group, dated_after/dated_before for date ranges.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact keeps the share breakdown, repayments and receipt presence and drops the avatars and the repeat/reminder/transaction block; "full" returns Splitwise's whole records.
limitNoMax results (API default: 20)
offsetNoPagination offset
group_idNoOnly expenses in this group
friend_idNoOnly expenses with this friend
dated_afterNoISO 8601 date — only expenses on or after this date
dated_beforeNoISO 8601 date — only expenses on or before this date
updated_afterNoISO 8601 datetime
updated_beforeNoISO 8601 datetime

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 keeps the share breakdown, repayments and receipt presence and drops the avatars and the repeat/reminder/transaction block; \"full\" returns Splitwise's whole records.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv2.1.5

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, and the description adds little beyond it. It states that all filters are optional and gives filter examples, but these are redundant with the schema and don't disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination defaults, rate limits, response shape, or auth requirements. For a list tool, the absence of pagination behavior or API limits is a meaningful gap.

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 three short sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose ('List or search Splitwise expenses') before giving filter guidance. It earns its place, though it could be even more structured by grouping the filter types, but overall it's concise and efficient.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a tool with 9 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is thin. It doesn't mention pagination mechanics (limit/offset), what the response looks like, or any default behavior beyond 'all filters optional.' An agent invoking this tool for the first time would still wonder how results are returned and whether there are hidden constraints. The annotations cover safety, but not the operational details needed for correct use.

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%, so the schema already documents all 9 parameters. The description adds slight value by highlighting group_id and dated_after/dated_before as common filters, but it doesn't enrich the meaning of any parameter beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'List or search Splitwise expenses.' It conveys the general action of retrieving expenses, and the mention of filters suggests a listing/search capability. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling to differentiate from, but 'list expenses' is distinct from 'get expense' and other group/friend operations, so an agent can reasonably tell it apart.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage by saying 'List or search Splitwise expenses' and notes that all filters are optional, with examples of filtering by group and date. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like sw_get_expense for single-expense retrieval. The guidance is adequate only at an implied level.

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