Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

splitwise-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

sw_update_user

Destructive

Update the current user's profile fields: name, locale and default currency. id must be the current user's id. The login email and password are deliberately not settable here — account credentials are changed in the Splitwise app, not by…

Instructions

Update the current user's profile fields: name, locale and default currency. id must be the current user's id. The login email and password are deliberately not settable here — account credentials are changed in the Splitwise app, not by an assistant. 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
idYesUser ID (must be the current user's id)
localeNo
last_nameNo
first_nameNo
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.
default_currencyNo

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. Changed2 schema fields changedv3.1.2
    • removedInput schema / properties / email
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / password
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
  3. 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"
  4. First observedv2.1.5

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true) by disclosing the confirmation protocol: an elicitation prompt where supported, otherwise a two-phase preview-plus-confirmToken flow referenced to MCP_CONFIRM_MODE. It also pre-empts an agent error by ruling out credential fields.

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?

Three sentences, purpose front-loaded, then the field exclusion, then the confirmation protocol. Dense but every clause carries actionable information; the parenthetical '(see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE)' is the only loose reference.

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 6-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and 33% schema coverage, the description covers the highest-risk dimensions: confirmation flow, id constraint, and forbidden fields. Remaining gap is value format semantics for locale and default_currency, which neither the schema nor description supplies.

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 only 33% (locale, first_name, last_name, default_currency are undocumented). The description partially compensates by naming the settable concepts ('name, locale and default currency') and explaining confirmToken's origin elsewhere, but it does not map 'name' to first_name/last_name or give any format guidance for locale or currency.

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 ('Update the current user's profile fields') and enumerates the settable fields (name, locale, default currency). An agent can distinguish it immediately from the read siblings sw_get_user / sw_get_current_user, and the 'current user only' constraint is explicit.

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 clear usage context: only the current user's id is valid, and email/password cannot be changed here because credentials live in the Splitwise app. It does not name a sibling alternative or state when to prefer this over, say, leaving profile data alone, but the scope boundaries are unambiguous.

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