Skip to main content
Glama

pylon_list_teams

Retrieve all teams from the Pylon customer support platform with optional pagination controls for managing team data efficiently.

Instructions

List all teams in Pylon

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoResults limit
cursorNoPagination cursor

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:585-598 (registration)
    Registration of the 'pylon_list_teams' MCP tool, including input schema (limit, cursor), description, and handler function that calls PylonClient.listTeams and returns JSON stringified result.
    server.tool(
    	'pylon_list_teams',
    	'List all teams in Pylon',
    	{
    		limit: z.number().min(1).max(1000).optional().describe('Results limit'),
    		cursor: z.string().optional().describe('Pagination cursor'),
    	},
    	async ({ limit, cursor }) => {
    		const result = await client.listTeams({ limit, cursor });
    		return {
    			content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }],
    		};
    	},
    );
  • Core handler logic for listing teams: constructs query params for limit and cursor, makes GET request to Pylon API /teams endpoint.
    async listTeams(params?: PaginationParams): Promise<PaginatedResponse<Team>> {
    	const searchParams = new URLSearchParams();
    	if (params?.limit) searchParams.set('limit', params.limit.toString());
    	if (params?.cursor) searchParams.set('cursor', params.cursor);
    	const query = searchParams.toString();
    	return this.request<PaginatedResponse<Team>>(
    		'GET',
    		`/teams${query ? `?${query}` : ''}`,
    	);
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of a Team object returned by the listTeams API.
    export interface Team {
    	id: string;
    	name: string;
    	users: { email: string; id: string }[];
    }
  • Type definition for pagination parameters used in listTeams (limit, cursor).
    export interface PaginationParams {
    	limit?: number;
    	cursor?: string;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'List all teams' but doesn't clarify if this is a read-only operation, whether it requires specific permissions, if there are rate limits, or what the output format looks like. For a list operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical behavioral traits unspecified.

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 that gets straight to the point with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple list operation and front-loaded with the core action, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's complexity (a list operation with pagination parameters), lack of annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like safety, permissions, or output format, which are essential for an agent to use this tool effectively in context with its siblings.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with 'limit' and 'cursor' clearly documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting, but doesn't compensate with extra context like default values or pagination behavior.

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 'List all teams in Pylon' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('teams in Pylon'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'pylon_get_team' (which retrieves a single team) or 'pylon_list_accounts' (which lists a different resource), missing explicit differentiation that would warrant a 5.

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 when to choose 'pylon_list_teams' over 'pylon_get_team' for single-team retrieval or 'pylon_search_issues' for filtered queries, nor does it specify prerequisites like authentication or context. This lack of 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.

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/JustinBeckwith/pylon-mcp'

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