Local MCP

List Microsoft 365 People Insights

list_m365_people_insights

Read-only

List the people most relevant to you in Microsoft 365 — based on your communication patterns, collaboration history, and org chart. Useful for meeting prep and contact enrichment.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Number of people to return (default 20, max 50)
`account`	No	Which connected Microsoft 365 account to use: its email (UPN), its id from list_m365_accounts, or its display name when unique. Leave it out to use the default account.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	No
`people`	No
`account`	No	The email (UPN) of the Microsoft 365 account this call used.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 24, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
```
Added value: +50
```

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / account

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Which connected Microsoft 365 account to use: its email (UPN), its id from list_m365_accounts, or its display name when unique. Leave it out to use the default account.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / account

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The email (UPN) of the Microsoft 365 account this call used.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedJun 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value by explaining that results are relevance-ranked from communication/collaboration signals, but says nothing about requiring a connected M365 account, freshness of the data, or result ordering guarantees.

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?

Two tight sentences: the capability and its ranking basis come first, the use case second. No filler, nothing to cut.

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?

An output schema exists and the account parameter already covers connection selection, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. It is nearly complete; only the prerequisite of a connected M365 account and the ranked-vs-filtered nature of results could be made explicit.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters (limit with default/max, account resolution order) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (people insights) plus the ranking basis — communication patterns, collaboration history, org chart. That distinguishes it from plain contact listing, though it never names the adjacent siblings (get_m365_person, search_m365_directory, m365_list_contacts) it could be confused with.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The clause 'useful for meeting prep and contact enrichment' implies a usage context, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no routing to the individual-lookup or directory-search alternatives.

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

All Local MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.