Skip to main content
Glama
trustxai

amazing-splitwise-mcp

by trustxai

splitwise_update_user

Idempotent

Update your Splitwise profile by changing first name, last name, locale, or default currency; email and password cannot be changed here.

Instructions

Update your Splitwise profile: first name, last name, locale and/or default currency.

Calls POST /update_user/{id} with only the fields you pass (at least one). This is a write: it is refused with Error: … writes are disabled unless SPLITWISE_ALLOW_WRITES=1. Email and password are NOT updatable on purpose — the input has no such fields and the server's client refuses to send them under any configuration, so an LLM can never change the account's login. There is no undo tool: to revert, read the current values first with splitwise_get_current_user and call this tool again with them.

When to Use:

  • To fix a typo in your name, or switch the default currency / interface locale.

When NOT to Use:

  • To change email or password (impossible here by design — do it at https://secure.splitwise.com).

  • To read your profile (use splitwise_get_current_user).

  • To rename a friend or group member (Splitwise does not allow editing other users).

Returns: A confirmation naming the user Splitwise returned and, for each field you sent, the value as it appears in the response. It is headed "Profile updated" only when every sent field comes back with exactly the value sent. Otherwise it is headed "Update accepted by Splitwise — N of M field(s) not confirmed" with those fields flagged, and tells you to read the profile back with splitwise_get_current_user. This is common for locale/default_currency, which the flat user object in the response may omit.

Examples:

  • params = {"user_id": 491923, "default_currency": "PEN"}

  • params = {"user_id": 491923, "first_name": "Ada", "last_name": "Lovelace", "locale": "es"}

Error Handling: Validation rejects a call with no field to change, an unknown field (including email/password) or a currency that is not a 3-letter code, before any request. locale is checked for format only and passed through; Splitwise decides whether it is supported (a value it ignores shows as 'differs' in the confirmation). 403 when user_id is not your own id; 400 with Splitwise's field messages for a value it rejects. A timeout or 5xx leaves the outcome UNKNOWN — read the profile back with splitwise_get_current_user before retrying.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare the safety/idempotency profile; the description adds far more: the SPLITWISE_ALLOW_WRITES=1 gate, that email/password are structurally impossible, that there is no undo (with the read-back-and-recall recovery pattern), the partial-confirmation semantics for locale/currency, and that a timeout/5xx leaves the outcome UNKNOWN. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs beyond structured 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?

Well-organized with clear headers and front-loaded purpose and write-gate warning. It is long, and the 'Returns' section partly restates what the output schema already conveys, so not every line is strictly additive, but nothing is filler.

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 annotations and an output schema, the definition still covers auth gating, reversibility, partial-success behavior, and error mapping (403/400/timeout). An agent has everything required to invoke and recover 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?

The description reinforces the 'at least one field' constraint, gives worked examples with concrete currency/locale values, and explains the locale pass-through-vs-validated distinction. The schema itself already documents each field, so the description mainly adds the cross-field constraint and example syntax rather than new per-parameter meaning.

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?

The opening sentence names a specific verb (Update) and resource (your Splitwise profile) and enumerates the exact mutable fields. It is trivially distinguishable from siblings like splitwise_get_current_user or splitwise_update_expense.

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?

Explicit 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections name the concrete alternative for reads (splitwise_get_current_user) and rule out email/password edits and editing other users. The routing is unambiguous.

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