churchtools-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List the members of a ChurchTools group

ct_list_group_members

Read-only

Lists members of a ChurchTools group with person ID, name, role ID, and membership status, with filters for name, roles, and status.

Instructions

Lists a group's members with person id, name, role id (groupTypeRoleId) and membership status.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "groupId": "<groupId>"
    },
    "name": "ct_list_group_members"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	The page, from 1
`limit`	No	Members per page, 1-200 (default 10)
`query`	No	Part of the member's first or last name
`groupId`	Yes	The group's id
`role_ids`	No	Only members with these role ids
`group_member_statuses`	No	Only members with these statuses

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 18, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the returned field set, which matters because there is no output schema, but it says nothing about pagination behavior, result ordering, or empty-result handling despite the schema exposing page/limit.

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?

One tight sentence with the core action front-loaded and zero padding. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the return fields, and all six parameters are self-documented in the schema. It is nearly complete for a read-only list tool; only pagination/ordering behavior is unaddressed.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds one genuinely new detail by naming 'groupTypeRoleId' as the role identifier, which the schema does not spell out, but filtering/pagination semantics are left entirely to the schema.

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 ('Lists') and resource ('a group's members') and even enumerates the returned fields (person id, name, role id, membership status). It is clearly distinguishable from the write siblings (ct_add_group_member, ct_remove_group_member, ct_update_group_member), though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing advice among the many sibling list/search tools (ct_get_group, ct_search_persons, ct_search_groups). The purpose implies the context, but the agent gets no explicit condition for choosing this tool.

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