Skip to main content
Glama
trustxai

amazing-splitwise-mcp

by trustxai

splitwise_undelete_expense

Idempotent

Restore a deleted Splitwise expense by ID to undo a deletion and bring back its original shares and balances.

Instructions

Restore a deleted expense.

Calls POST /undelete_expense/{id}. Refused with Error: … writes are disabled unless SPLITWISE_ALLOW_WRITES=1 (enforced by the server's client). The expense comes back with its original shares, so balances change again.

When to Use:

  • Undo a splitwise_delete_expense.

  • Bring back an expense seen as [deleted] in splitwise_get_expenses with include_deleted=true.

When NOT to Use:

  • On an expense that is not deleted (nothing to restore).

  • To restore a deleted group (use splitwise_undelete_group).

Returns: The success value Splitwise returned.

Examples:

  • params = {"expense_id": 3456789012}

Error Handling: Splitwise answers 200 even when it refuses — the client turns success: false into Error: Splitwise rejected the request…. 404 → wrong id; 403 → not your expense.

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
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the SPLITWISE_ALLOW_WRITES=1 gate and its refusal message, the side effect that balances change again via restored shares, and detailed error semantics (200-on-refusal, 404 vs 403). This is exactly the behavioral context annotations cannot carry.

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 action, then routes via labeled sections; nearly every line earns its place. The 'Returns: The success value Splitwise returned.' line is largely redundant given an output schema exists, costing the top score.

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?

For a write tool with an unavoidable auth/environment prerequisite, the definition covers the gate, side effects, alternatives, a call example, and error mapping. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly, and return values are covered by the output schema.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides a concrete example call with a nested params wrapper and an integer id, which usefully disambiguates the envelope shape, but adds no further semantics for the single expense_id field.

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 (Restore) and resource (a deleted expense) in the first line, and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling splitwise_undelete_group. An agent can route to it without opening any schema.

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?

Dedicated 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections name the exact triggering operations (undo splitwise_delete_expense, recover `[deleted]` rows from splitwise_get_expenses) and point to the correct alternative for groups.

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