Skip to main content
Glama

Immersive Commons

by com.immersivecommons

List IC members / accounts (operator)

ic_admin_list_members
Read-only

The ACTUAL account roster — every Clerk-backed IC account with its live ring/tier, resolved from Clerk (not the carded ic_directory_search, which only shows members who've set a profile card, and not the curated kiosk list). This is what you want to answer 'who are the members' or find a specific account (e.g. one that hasn't set a card yet). Each member: { user_id, name, email, tier ('public'|'ft-member'|'ai-floor'|'ic-member'|'operator'), pending_request (the tier they've requested but not yet been granted, or null), created_at }. Args: { tier?: filter to one ring; q?: case-insensitive name/email/user_id substring filter; limit?: number (default 200, max 500); offset?: number (default 0) }. Filters apply to the fetched page; total is the full Clerk account count and has_more tells you to page with offset (default limit covers all IC accounts in one page today). Required scope: admin:tier_review.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoCase-insensitive substring match on name / email / user_id.
tierNoFilter the page to accounts currently at this ring.
limitNoPage size (default 200).
offsetNoPage offset (default 0).

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint annotation, description explains it's the actual roster, includes pending_request, resolves from Clerk, and details pagination behavior (filters apply to page, total is full count).

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?

Well-structured: starts with core purpose, then sibling distinction, then return fields, then args, then pagination. No wasted sentences.

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?

Despite no output schema, description enumerates all return fields (user_id, name, email, tier, pending_request, created_at) and explains pagination and required scope.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Adds meaning beyond schema: explains q is case-insensitive subtitle, limit default 200, offset default 0, and that filters apply to fetched page not overall. Full coverage.

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 description clearly states it lists all Clerk-backed IC accounts with their live ring/tier, and contrasts with ic_directory_search and curated kiosk list, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (to answer 'who are the members' or find a specific account) and distinguishes from sibling tools (ic_directory_search, curated list). Also explains filters and pagination.

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

All Immersive Commons toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly scoped to distinct actions (e.g., ic_hack_apply vs. ic_hack_register, ic_rooms_create vs. ic_rooms_join). A few pairs could confuse an agent: floor10_submit_highlight vs. floorcast_push both submit HighlightStories but to different queues, and ic_directory_search / ic_agent_directory_lookup / ic_admin_list_members overlap in searching members. Overall, the long descriptions help disambiguate, but the volume requires careful reading.

Naming Consistency3/5

The dominant pattern is ic_<domain>_<verb>_<object> (e.g., ic_admin_list_pending_events, ic_headsets_checkout), but there are notable deviations: floor10_* and floorcast_* prefixes break the ic_ convention, and a few tools use noun-style names (ic_health, ic_capabilities, ic_donations_total). Verb placement also varies (get_* vs *_get, e.g., ic_get_my_membership vs. ic_membership_set_profile). Still, most names are readable and predictable.

Tool Count1/5

175 tools is an extreme count for a single MCP server, far beyond the 50+ threshold that indicates an unwieldy surface. While the platform covers many domains (events, files, hackathon, headsets, prints, rooms, etc.), bundling everything into one server makes discovery and selection difficult. This would be better split into several narrowly-scoped servers.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers nearly every lifecycle for each domain: CRUD for files/folders, full hackathon admissions and judging, headset lending with waivers and incidents, print farm submission and handoffs, and room coordination. Minor gaps exist: no delete for files/folders, no cancel for events, and some actions (like revoking a Z.ai key or tearing down a room) are explicitly left to human console use. Overall, the surface is remarkably comprehensive for the stated scope.

Resources