zd_list_usersList all Zendesk users (agents and end-users) in the connected account. Returns user IDs, names, emails, and roles. Supports pagination via page number.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| count | No | Total count of users | |
| users | No | List of users | |
| next_page | No | URL to next page |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "count": {
+ "description": "Total count of users",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "next_page": {
+ "description": "URL to next page",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "users": {
+ "description": "List of users",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "created_at": {
+ "description": "Creation timestamp",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "email": {
+ "description": "User email",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "User ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "User name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "role": {
+ "description": "User role",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "page": 1
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds value beyond annotations by specifying return fields (IDs, names, emails, roles) and pagination support. Annotations already cover safety, and description complements them without contradiction.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second details return and pagination. Front-loaded and efficient.
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?
Covers essential aspects: scope, return fields, pagination. Could mention default page or limits, but with output schema present and annotations rich, it is sufficiently complete.
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 has 100% coverage with 'Page number'. Description adds context that page is for pagination, linking it to the listing behavior, which is useful for agent understanding.
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?
Clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'Zendesk users', specifying scope as all agents and end-users. Distinguishes from siblings like zd_get_user (single user) and zd_search_tickets (tickets).
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?
Implicitly indicates use for listing all users, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The sibling context provides some differentiation.
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.
Many tools have overlapping purposes, especially the Pipeworx query tools (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, validate_claim) which all provide factual answers, making it unclear which to use. The set also mixes Zendesk tools with a large number of prediction market and data tools, creating confusion.
Naming conventions are inconsistent: Zendesk tools use 'zd_' prefix, Pipeworx tools use various prefixes like 'ask_', 'bet_', 'compare_', etc., and some are named with full words. There is no uniform pattern across the set.
35 tools is high for a server named 'Zendesk', especially since only 5 are Zendesk-specific. The majority are unrelated to Zendesk, indicating the tool count is inappropriate for the implied purpose.
For a Zendesk server, the tool set is severely incomplete, offering only basic CRUD operations (get, list, search for tickets and users). Missing essential Zendesk features like ticket creation, update, delete, or macros, while containing many irrelevant tools from other domains.