Skip to main content
Glama
FiredMosquito831

multi-account-netlify-mcp

netlify-user-services-reader

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Netlify user details from one, several, or all configured accounts, using the account argument to route the read-only get-user operation.

Instructions

Select and run one of the following Netlify read operations (read-only) get-user

Multi-account (the account argument): get-user: every named account answers.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNoNetlify account to use: one name, several names separated by commas, or "all". Lists and all only work for operations that allow them; changes need one name. Leave out to use the default account. Accounts: none yet.
selectSchemaYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful multi-account behavior ('get-user: every named account answers') but does not describe authentication, rate limits, or return behavior beyond what annotations provide.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is short, but the structure is awkward: it says 'one of the following' operations while listing only get-user, and the multi-account sentence is hard to parse. It is not verbose, but it is not cleanly front-loaded or well-formed.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a reader tool with no output schema and 50% schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what get-user returns, and it does not differentiate this user-services reader from sibling service readers, leaving selection gaps.

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 50%, and the account parameter already has a rich schema description. The description adds meaning about how get-user interacts with multiple named accounts, but it does not explain the nested selectSchema fields such as aiAgentName, llmModelName, or params.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource cluster: 'Select and run one of the following Netlify read operations (read-only) get-user.' This makes clear it executes the get-user read operation, but it does not distinguish this from sibling readers such as team-services-reader or project-services-reader.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling read tools. The only usage-adjacent note is about multi-account behavior for the account argument, which does not help an agent choose between this and other Netlify service readers.

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