Skip to main content
Glama

List users

mite_list_users
Read-only

Lists active or archived users with id, name, role and archive status, so you can find user IDs for time entries or identify the current user.

Instructions

Lists users from mite, active ones or with archived: true the archived ones; use it to look up user ids for user_id in mite_list_time_entries, and mite_whoami for the current user. Returns id, name, role and archived flag per user; email addresses and hourly rates are not returned. The whole list is returned at once without paging.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
archivedNotrue = list archived entries instead of the active ones, e.g. true. Default: false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / archived / description
      Previous value: -"true = list archived entries instead of the active ones."New value: +"true = list archived entries instead of the active ones, e.g. true. Default: false."
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, it discloses the returned fields (id, name, role, archived flag), explicitly excludes email addresses and hourly rates, and notes the whole list comes back without paging — a real behavioral constraint an agent would otherwise have to discover by trial.

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?

A single dense sentence whose clauses each carry distinct information: scope, cross-reference, return shape, exclusions, and pagination. Purpose is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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?

With only one fully-documented optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what is returned, what is deliberately omitted, and that no pagination handling is required.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents `archived` with its default and meaning. The description's 'active ones or with `archived: true` the archived ones' restates the same semantics rather than adding format or edge-case detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists users from mite') plus the scope switch (active vs. archived). It explicitly distinguishes itself from mite_whoami, which returns the current user, so an agent can separate it from that sibling without opening a schema.

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?

Gives a concrete use case ('look up user ids for `user_id` in `mite_list_time_entries`') and names the alternative for the current-user case ('`mite_whoami` for the current user'). When-to-use and when-not-to-use are both present with named siblings.

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