Skip to main content
Glama

get_user_info

Retrieve detailed user information from Slack workspaces by providing a user ID to access profile data and workspace details.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific user

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userYesUser ID (e.g., U1234567890)

Implementation Reference

  • The main handler function that executes the get_user_info tool logic: parses args with schema, calls Slack users.info API, returns user info.
    export async function getUserInfo(client: SlackClientWrapper, args: unknown) {
      const params = getUserInfoSchema.parse(args);
    
      return await client.safeCall(async () => {
        const result = await client.getClient().users.info({
          user: params.user,
        });
    
        return {
          user: result.user,
        };
      });
    }
  • Zod input validation schema for get_user_info tool requiring a valid user ID.
    export const getUserInfoSchema = z.object({
      user: userIdSchema,
    });
  • src/index.ts:137-150 (registration)
    Tool definition registered in the tools list for list_tools handler, including MCP input schema.
    {
      name: 'get_user_info',
      description: 'Get detailed information about a specific user',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          user: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'User ID (e.g., U1234567890)',
          },
        },
        required: ['user'],
      },
    },
  • src/index.ts:422-422 (registration)
    Handler mapping in toolHandlers object that connects 'get_user_info' tool calls to the userTools.getUserInfo implementation.
    get_user_info: (args) => userTools.getUserInfo(slackClient, args),
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a read operation ('Get'), but doesn't clarify permissions required, rate limits, error handling, or what 'detailed information' includes (e.g., profile data, activity status). For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every part of the sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool's purpose.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that presumably returns user details. It doesn't explain what information is returned (e.g., email, roles, status), error cases, or how it differs from sibling tools like 'list_users'. For a read operation with no structured output documentation, more context is needed.

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%, with the parameter 'user' documented as 'User ID (e.g., U1234567890)'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format constraints or examples of valid inputs. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific user'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from potential alternatives like 'list_users' (which appears in sibling tools) or explain what 'detailed information' entails beyond a basic user lookup.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'list_users' (for listing all users) or 'get_team_info' (for broader context), nor does it specify prerequisites such as needing a user ID versus a username. Usage is implied but not explicitly defined.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Hais/slack-bot-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server