user_friendsList the friends of a Roblox user by numeric user_id; returns each friend's user ID, username, display name, and presence status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| user_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | No | Array of friend user objects | |
| nextPageCursor | No | Cursor for pagination |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "user_id": 1
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "description": "Friends list response",
+ "properties": {
+ "data": {
+ "description": "Array of friend user objects",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "displayName": {
+ "description": "Friend display name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Friend user ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Friend username",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "nextPageCursor": {
+ "description": "Cursor for pagination",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint as true/true/true/false, indicating a safe, idempotent read operation. The description adds value by specifying returned fields and presence status, which goes beyond annotations.
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?
A single sentence that conveys purpose, input, and output with no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with key information.
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?
Given the presence of an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description covers all needed aspects: input, output, and behavior. No further details are necessary for a simple list 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?
The schema has one parameter 'user_id' with type 'number'. The description restates 'numeric user_id' but adds no additional constraints, format, or examples beyond the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not compensate significantly.
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 clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'friends', the required input 'numeric user_id', and the output fields (user ID, username, display name, presence status). It is distinct from siblings like 'user_followers_count' which count followers.
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?
The description implies use for listing friends of a user, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives. However, the context of sibling tools (e.g., user_badges, user_games) makes the purpose clear enough.
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.
Most tools have distinct purposes, especially within the Roblox and Pipeworx domains. However, the three variants of ask_pipeworx (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) are very similar and could cause confusion, as could deep_research vs ask_pipeworx.
Naming conventions are mixed: snake_case (user_followers_count), verb_noun with underscores (ask_pipeworx), and camelCase (recall, forget). Roblox tools follow a consistent 'user_' prefix, but Pipeworx tools lack a uniform pattern.
41 tools is excessive for a server named 'Roblox'. The majority of tools are Pipeworx data utilities, which are unrelated to the server's apparent focus. This overloading undermines coherence.
Coverage within the Roblox domain is basic (user profiles, friends, games) but misses common features like asset details or group management. Pipeworx appears comprehensive for data lookups, but the overall set lacks unified domain completeness.