Skip to main content
Glama
Dialpad MCP server

Dialpad MCP server

dialpad_list_users

Read-onlyIdempotent

List Dialpad users with name, email, phone, extension, office, and status; filter by exact email, phone number, or name prefix, and return active users by default.

Instructions

List Dialpad users (staff) with name, email, phone numbers, extension, office and state. Filter by email, by phone number, or by first/last name prefix. Defaults to active users.

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": "dialpad_list_users"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fullNoReturn every field of each item instead of the main fields only. Larger output; use only when needed.
emailNoExact email address.
stateNoUser state (default active).
cursorNoCursor from next_cursor of the previous page, to get the next page.
numberNoA phone number assigned to the user, in E.164 format.
last_nameNoLast-name prefix. Cannot be combined with email or number.
first_nameNoFirst-name prefix. Cannot be combined with email or number.
company_adminNoOnly company admins (true) or only non-admins (false).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds genuine behavioral context by disclosing the returned field set and that the default scope is active users, which the annotations do not convey. It stops short of covering pagination behavior or the effect of the 'full' flag on output size, keeping it below the top score.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and its returned fields, followed by the filtering capability. There is no filler, hedging, or redundant restatement of the tool name.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description does its part by naming the fields returned, but for an eight-parameter list tool it says nothing about the 'full' flag's output-expansion tradeoff, about how name prefixes and email/number filters interact, or about result volume. The safety and pagination concerns are handled by annotations and the schema respectively, so the description is adequate but not complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every one of the eight parameters is already documented, and the description largely restates those filter options rather than adding syntax, precedence, or interaction rules. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema, not the prose, carries parameter meaning.

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 ("List Dialpad users") and enumerates the primary fields returned, so the agent knows it is a paginated collection read rather than a single-record fetch. It does not name the sibling dialpad_get_user, which is the natural alternative for a single lookup, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

Gives filter modes (email, phone, first/last name prefix) and the default state, which implies context of use, but never says when to choose dialpad_get_user instead of this list tool or when a filter is required vs optional. Usage is implied rather than prescribed, and the mutual-exclusivity constraint is only carried by the schema.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.