Skip to main content
Glama
PhononX

Carbon Voice

by PhononX
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

search_users

Read-only

Resolve multiple users into user IDs by email, phone, ID, or name. Use before any tool that requires user IDs.

Instructions

Resolve several users at once by emails, phones, IDs or names. USE WHEN: Turning a list of people into user IDs in one call — the right first step before any tool that takes user IDs. Name search only matches your contacts. USE INSTEAD: search_user for a single lookup. get_user for a full profile once you have the ID. EXAMPLE: {"names":["Brett"]} RETURNS: Array of {id, full_name, first_name, last_name?, link, languages?, ...}. If a name returns more than one candidate, ask which person was meant rather than guessing. NARROW: pass response_fields ["id","full_name"] unless you need more — the full payload is much larger.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsNoUser IDs
namesNoThe names of the users to search for (Only users that are part of your contacts will be returned)
emailsNoEmail Addresses
phonesNoPhone Numbers
response_fieldsNoDot-path allowlist to shrink the response, e.g. ["results.id","total"]. Omit for the full payload.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.10.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_fields
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Dot-path allowlist to shrink the response, e.g. [\"results.id\",\"total\"]. Omit for the full payload.",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: 'Name search only matches your contacts' reveals a filtering quirk, and 'If a name returns more than one candidate, ask which person was meant rather than guessing' prescribes handling for ambiguity. The NARROW note about payload size also discloses performance characteristics.

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?

Every labeled section (USE WHEN, USE INSTEAD, EXAMPLE, RETURNS, NARROW) earns its place, and the primary purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence. The labeled format makes scanning easy, and despite the length, there is zero filler or repetition of schema content.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a tool with 5 optional params and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what it returns (array of user objects with optional fields), how to disambiguate results, how to scope names, and how to shrink the payload. Combined with annotations covering the safety profile, no critical operational detail is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds value beyond the schema: the EXAMPLE `{"names":["Brett"]}` demonstrates the argument shape, and the NARROW line explains exactly how response_fields should be used ('pass response_fields ["id","full_name"] unless you need more'). This goes beyond the schema's terse 'Dot-path allowlist' wording.

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 opening line, 'Resolve several users at once by emails, phones, IDs or names,' names a specific verb, resource, and scope explicitly. The 'at once' phrasing immediately distinguishes it from the sibling `search_user` (single lookup), so an agent can tell them apart without inspecting their schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The USE WHEN section states the exact trigger condition ('Turning a list of people into user IDs in one call') and even names the alternative routes: `search_user for single lookup, get_user for a full profile once the ID is known. This is explicit when/when-not guidance with named alternatives — nothing is left to inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools