Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

splitwise-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

sw_list_groups

Read-only

List all Splitwise groups the current user belongs to. Returns id, name, and members for each group. Use this to resolve a group name to its id.

Instructions

List all Splitwise groups the current user belongs to. Returns id, name, and members for each group. Use this to resolve a group name to its id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoResponse shape: "compact" (default) drops fields the response already carries elsewhere; "full" returns every field this server understands. compact drops the avatar/cover-photo URLs (60% of a live 51-group response, which does not fit in a tool result at all) and the whiteboard/reminder settings; "full" returns Splitwise's whole records.

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 drops the avatar/cover-photo URLs (60% of a live 51-group response, which does not fit in a tool result at all) and the whiteboard/reminder settings; \"full\" returns Splitwise's whole records.",
+  "enum": [
+    "compact",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv2.1.5

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already declaring the safety and scope profile, the description adds useful behavioral value by disclosing the return contents (id, name, members). It does not mention response size or pagination behavior, which the schema touches on for the 'full' view, but the annotation-covered baseline is met.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and its scope, then return shape, then usage. No filler; every sentence carries distinct information.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema and a fully documented parameter, the description covers purpose, scope, and return fields adequately. It stops short of describing ordering, pagination, or how many groups may be returned, which would fully close the loop.

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%, and the single 'view' parameter is richly documented in the schema itself (compact vs full, what gets dropped). The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource ('List all Splitwise groups') plus scope ('the current user belongs to'), which cleanly separates it from sw_get_group (single group) and sw_create_group. An agent can identify the operation without opening the 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?

Gives concrete usage context: 'Use this to resolve a group name to its id.' That is a clear when-to-use statement, but it does not name alternatives such as sw_get_group or note any exclusions, so it falls short of the explicit alternative-routing that earns 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