Skip to main content
Glama
trustxai

amazing-splitwise-mcp

by trustxai

splitwise_get_friend

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a specific friend's overall and per-group balances. Confirm a user ID belongs to a friend before adding an expense.

Instructions

Get one Splitwise friend with their overall and per-group balances.

Calls GET /get_friend/{id}. Renders the friend as First Last (id N), e-mail, registration status, the overall balance per currency, the balance in each shared group (group 0 = non-group expenses) and when the friendship last changed. Sign convention: positive = they owe you; negative = you owe them.

When to Use:

  • To see how a balance with one friend splits across shared groups.

  • To confirm a user id belongs to a friend before using it in an expense.

When NOT to Use:

  • To list every friend (use splitwise_get_friends).

  • To turn a name into an id (use splitwise_resolve_friend).

  • For a user who is not a friend (use splitwise_get_user).

Returns: Markdown: a summary block plus a "Shared groups" list. JSON: the raw friend object.

Examples:

  • params = {"friend_id": 4821}

  • params = {"friend_id": 4821, "response_format": "json"}

Error Handling: 404 means the id is not one of your friends (or does not exist); 401 means the API key is missing or revoked.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the sign convention (positive = they owe you), the markdown-vs-json output shape, and the 404/401 error meanings. It stops short of describing pagination or rate-limit behavior, but for a single-entity read that is a minor omission.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and sign convention before the routing guidance, and each section (usage, returns, examples, errors) earns its place. It is somewhat long for a one-parameter read tool, with mild redundancy between the 'Returns' section and the response_format explanation.

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?

Covers routing, endpoint, rendering format, sign convention, examples, and error codes for a tool whose annotations already establish the safety profile and whose output schema exists. An agent has everything needed to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

Reported schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it does: it shows the id flows into GET /get_friend/{id}, gives a concrete example value (4821), and explains that response_format='json' returns the raw friend object versus markdown for a readable summary. It lacks detail on valid id ranges or failure modes per format, hence a 4 rather than 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one Splitwise friend') and immediately scopes the payload to overall and per-group balances. It is unmistakably distinct from splitwise_get_friends, splitwise_resolve_friend, and splitwise_get_user, all of which it names.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Provides explicit 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections with three named alternatives (splitwise_get_friends, splitwise_resolve_friend, splitwise_get_user) each paired with the condition that selects them. No inference is required from the agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.