Skip to main content
Glama

Fresha MCP Server and API by Cotlet

List clients

list_clients
Read-onlyIdempotent

Clients of the business, searchable by name, email or phone. Lists clients as the Client list shows them, newest first by default, with email, mobile, gender, total sales, review count and whether they are blocked. search matches name, email or phone. total is the number of matching clients. Page with next_cursor.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_clients"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoOrder: newest (default), oldest or name.
limitNoPage size, at most 50 (Fresha refuses more). Default: 50.
cursorNonext_cursor from the previous call.
searchNoName, email or phone.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description's added value is in disclosing the return columns, the default sort, and cursor pagination semantics, which it does. It stops short of mentioning rate limits or what happens with an expired cursor.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the resource and searchable fields. Every clause carries information, though the return-field list is a touch long.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields, the 'total' count, and the next_cursor pagination contract — everything an agent needs to call and iterate this list tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so 3 is the baseline, and the description adds real meaning: it clarifies that 'search' spans name/email/phone and that cursor comes from a prior 'next_cursor'. The sort enum and limit cap are already in the schema, so no further lift is required.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Lists clients') plus the searchable fields and the returned columns (email, mobile, gender, total sales, review count, blocked). It is trivially distinguishable from the singular get_client sibling, and the default ordering is stated up front.

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?

Gives clear operational context: default order is newest first, search matches name/email/phone, and results are paged via next_cursor. It does not explicitly say when to prefer this over get_client or list_appointments, but usage is readily inferred.

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.