Fetch the complete list of users assigned to the active group, enabling member management and access review.
Get Group Members [GET /api/groups/members] Returns all users belonging to the current group
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| orderBy | No | ||
| perPage | No | ||
| queryFilter | No | ||
| orderDirection | No | desc | |
| paginationSeed | No | ||
| orderByNullPosition | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.11Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It claims 'Returns all users belonging to the current group', but the input schema includes pagination and filtering parameters, implying that the tool does not necessarily return all users at once. This omission of pagination behavior is misleading.
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?
The description is very short, which is positive for conciseness. However, it fails to provide essential information, so it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise. The structure is basic but acceptable.
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 complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It omits pagination, sorting, filtering, authentication, return format, and any prerequisites. The minimal description is insufficient for effective tool use.
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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no explanation for any of the 7 parameters. It does not clarify the role of page, perPage, queryFilter, orderBy, etc. The agent cannot infer how to use these parameters from the description alone.
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 'Get', the resource 'group members', and the scope 'current group'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_group_member' (singular) and 'get_household_members' (different resource), showing high specificity.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or what conditions must be met. Given the presence of numerous sibling tools, the lack of any usage direction is a significant gap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.