MCP Microsoft Teams Server

list_members

List all members in a Microsoft Teams team to see who has access and support communication workflows.

Instructions

List all members in the team

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page_size`	No	Number of members to retrieve per request

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.13Aug 30, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / page_size

Added value: +{
+  "default": 100,
+  "description": "Number of members to retrieve per request",
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "title": "Page Size",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedOutput schema / $defs / TeamsMember / properties / id

Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "description": "Member ID used in mentions",
+  "title": "Id",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.8May 3, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$defs": {
+    "TeamsMember": {
+      "properties": {
+        "email": {
+          "description": "Member email",
+          "title": "Email",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "name": {
+          "description": "Member name used in mentions and user information cards",
+          "title": "Name",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "name",
+        "email"
+      ],
+      "title": "TeamsMember",
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "properties": {
+    "result": {
+      "items": {
+        "$ref": "#/$defs/TeamsMember"
+      },
+      "title": "Result",
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "result"
+  ],
+  "title": "list_membersOutput",
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv1.0.0Apr 3, 2025

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. 'List' reasonably implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose pagination behavior despite the page_size parameter, nor does it clarify whether 'all members' means a single response or requires multiple requests.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource without repeating the tool name or schema details.

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?

The tool is simple and an output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. However, the description lacks usage guidance relative to siblings and does not clarify pagination despite page_size existing, leaving a small but relevant gap for an agent deciding how to retrieve all members.

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 the page_size parameter is already well documented with default, minimum, and maximum values. The description adds no additional meaning about how paging works or how page_size relates to the 'all members' claim, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description uses a specific verb and resource ('List all members') that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_member_by_name and list_threads. The scope ('in the team') is explicit and unambiguous.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool (when you need all team members) but does not explicitly rule out or contrast with the sibling get_member_by_name. There is no when-not-to-use guidance or reference to alternatives.

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

Deploy Server