Tokenrip

List workspace members

workspace_member_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the people added to this workspace (guests), each with role editor or viewer; the owner and the owning team's members are not listed (their access comes from ownership or the team). Everyone in the workspace sees all of it and may list. With share (editors) the list also has pending invites (by email, with an inviteUrl that is safe to share) and each row's id (the member, for set_role and remove); a viewer gets the people only, with id, email and inviteUrl null.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "workspaceId": "<workspaceId>"
    },
    "name": "workspace_member_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`workspaceId`	Yes	The workspace: its id or its slug.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`members`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedOct 24, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / description

Previous value: -"The workspace id (UUID)."New value: +"The workspace: its id or its slug."

removedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / format
```
Removed value: -"uuid"
```
addedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / maxLength
```
Added value: +64
```
addedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```

removedInput schema / properties / workspaceId / pattern

Removed value: -"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations by disclosing that output shape depends on the caller's rights: editors with share get pending invites (email plus inviteUrl labelled safe to share) and per-row member ids, while viewers get rows with id, email and inviteUrl null. It also explains why the owner and team members are absent (access derives from ownership or team).

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the first clause establishes what is listed and the last clauses cover permission-dependent output. Every clause carries information, though the single semicolon-chained sentence makes the conditional 'share' behavior harder to parse on a first read.

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?

For a one-parameter read tool with annotations and an output schema in place, the definition covers selection context, exclusions, permissions, and caller-dependent output variation. The residual gap is the undefined 'share' qualifier, which the agent may need to infer from the environment.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema itself documenting that workspaceId accepts an id or a slug. The description adds no further meaning about that parameter, 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 and resource ('List the people added to this workspace (guests)') and immediately scopes it by role and by explicit exclusions (owner and owning team's members, with the reason). An agent can distinguish this from workspace_member_add/remove/set_role without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Tells the agent who may call it ('Everyone in the workspace ... may list') and when the output enriches (callers with 'share' get pending invites and member ids). It also points to the follow-on use of the returned ids ('for set_role and remove'). However, the term 'share (editors)' is never defined as a parameter, permission, or flag, leaving some ambiguity about how a caller knows whether they qualify.

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

All Tokenrip 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.