Skip to main content
Glama

List users

list_users
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get a paginated list of the users of the organization, newest first. Filter them by email address to find the user IDs used by the project members and the email and SMS recipients.

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_users"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number to show
emailNoFilter users by email. Can be specified multiple times to filter by multiple email addresses.
per_pageNoNumber of resources to return per page

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
metaNoMeta data for pagination

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "data": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "properties": {
      +          "created_at": {
      +            "description": "Date of creation for the entity",
      +            "format": "date-time",
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "email": {
      +            "description": "User email",
      +            "examples": [
      +              "nicolas@phare.io"
      +            ],
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "id": {
      +            "description": "User ID",
      +            "examples": [
      +              1
      +            ],
      +            "type": "integer"
      +          },
      +          "role": {
      +            "description": "User current role",
      +            "enum": [
      +              "viewer",
      +              "responder",
      +              "member",
      +              "admin"
      +            ],
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "updated_at": {
      +            "description": "Date of last update for the entity",
      +            "format": "date-time",
      +            "type": "string"
      +          }
      +        },
      +        "type": "object"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "meta": {
      +      "description": "Meta data for pagination",
      +      "properties": {
      +        "current_page": {
      +          "examples": [
      +            2
      +          ],
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        },
      +        "from": {
      +          "examples": [
      +            11
      +          ],
      +          "type": [
      +            "integer",
      +            "null"
      +          ]
      +        },
      +        "has_more_pages": {
      +          "description": "Whether a next page exists, fetched with the page argument",
      +          "type": "boolean"
      +        },
      +        "per_page": {
      +          "examples": [
      +            100
      +          ],
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        },
      +        "to": {
      +          "examples": [
      +            20
      +          ],
      +          "type": [
      +            "integer",
      +            "null"
      +          ]
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "type": "object"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds pagination and newest-first ordering, but does not disclose permission requirements, rate limits, or other operational constraints beyond that; useful but limited additional context.

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?

Two sentences with the primary action front-loaded and no obvious filler. The second sentence is slightly convoluted in tying email filtering to project members and recipients, but it remains purposeful.

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?

For a read-only list tool with annotations covering safety, full schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is complete: it names the resource, scope, ordering, pagination, and filter purpose. Nothing critical is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so page, per_page, and email are fully documented by the schema. The description reinforces the email filter's purpose but adds no syntax or edge-case details beyond the schema; baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a paginated list of the users of the organization') and adds ordering ('newest first'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling get_user or whoami, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Provides an implied use case for the email filter (finding user IDs for project members and email/SMS recipients), but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus get_user or whoami, nor when-not to use this list.

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.

Resources