list_usersList all team members on the account
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number (0-indexed) | |
| limit | No | Results per page |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | No | One row per team member — id, email, fullname, role, avatar_url, the clients they can reach, and invite_pending while they have not accepted yet. | |
| meta | No | Page, limit and total row count. | |
| success | Yes | True when the call succeeded. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Output schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Output schema / properties / meta / descriptionPrevious value: -"Pagination for the list — page, limit and the total row count."New value: +"Page, limit and total row count."Output schema / properties / meta / properties / limit / descriptionPrevious value: -"Maximum rows per page."New value: +"Max rows per page."Output schema / properties / meta / properties / page / descriptionPrevious value: -"Zero-based index of the page returned."New value: +"Page index, zero-based."Output schema / properties / meta / properties / total / descriptionPrevious value: -"Total rows matching the query across all pages."New value: +"Total rows matching the query."Output schema / properties / success / descriptionPrevious value: -"True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead."New value: +"True when the call succeeded."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the account-scoping detail, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, result ordering, or whether the list includes only active users. The openWorldHint=false annotation aligns with the 'on the account' scoping.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states precisely what the tool does. There is no redundant wording or repetition of the title or annotations.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only list operation with annotations, a documented input schema, and an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It could be improved by mentioning that results are paginated and perhaps that all users are returned regardless of status, but nothing essential is missing for correctly invoking the tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the page and limit parameters are already documented. The description does not add details about defaults or pagination semantics, but it also does not need to because the schema covers the parameter meaning.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('team members') with a clear scope ('on the account'). It distinguishes the tool from related user-management siblings like invite_user, update_user, remove_user, and get_current_user by focusing on the listing action.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as list_clients or get_current_user. There is no mention of prerequisites, whether to prefer pagination, or what distinguishes team members from other entities.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.