Skip to main content
Glama

Teams List Teams

teams_list_teams
Read-only

Lists the Microsoft Teams teams the Microsoft 365 account belongs to, by name. Start here for channels: the team id feeds teams_list_channels and teams_read_channel_messages. (For direct and group chats use teams_list_chats.) Reads at most 20 pages of teams. When the read is cut (by that bound, or because the call ran out of time) the answer has truncated: true. Needs a work or school Microsoft 365 account connected with connect_m365_account (personal Microsoft accounts have no Teams reads). When no Microsoft 365 account is connected at all, it reads the Teams app's local cache on this Mac instead (needs Full Disk Access, can be hours or days behind); the answer's source says which one answered (graph or local_cache).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoWhich 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

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNo
countNo
errorNo
teamsNo
sourceNoWhich source answered: graph (Microsoft 365) or local_cache (the Teams app's cache on this Mac, used only when no Microsoft 365 account is connected).
accountNoThe email (UPN) of the Microsoft 365 account this call used.
fix_toolNo
truncatedNoPresent and true only when the read was cut before it had everything it was asked for.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / fix_tool
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / source
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Which source answered: graph (Microsoft 365) or local_cache (the Teams app's cache on this Mac, used only when no Microsoft 365 account is connected).",
      +  "enum": [
      +    "graph",
      +    "local_cache"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
  2. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • 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"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / note
      Added value: +{
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / truncated
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Present and true only when the read was cut before it had everything it was asked for.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the read-only annotations: it discloses the 20-page read bound, the timeout truncation signal (truncated: true), the required work/school account, and a full fallback path (local cache with Full Disk Access, potentially stale). The source field disambiguating graph vs. local_cache is exactly the kind of behavior an agent cannot infer from 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.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Dense but front-loaded: purpose first, then routing, then bounds, then auth/fallback. Every clause carries operational information (truncation, source, prerequisites) rather than restating the name.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is unnecessary, yet the description still clarifies the two fields an agent must act on (truncated and source). Auth requirements, fallback behavior, and sibling routing are all covered for a read tool of this complexity.

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 100% and the single account parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the default-account behavior. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (list) and resource (Microsoft Teams teams), scoped by the account's membership and returned by name. It also explicitly names the siblings it differs from (teams_list_chats for chats) and routes to the downstream channel tools.

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?

Gives explicit entry-point guidance ('Start here for channels'), names the follow-on tools the returned id feeds, and states the alternative for chats. Prerequisites for both account-connected and no-account cases are spelled out.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources