Claude Orchestrator MCP

List Group Sessions

list_group_sessions

List all active sessions in a project group to coordinate multiple Claude Code instances.

Instructions

List all active sessions in a project group.

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": {
      "groupName": "<groupName>"
    },
    "name": "list_group_sessions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`groupName`	Yes	Name of the project group

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sessions`	Yes
`groupName`	Yes
`activeCount`	Yes
`totalMembers`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does hint that only 'active' sessions are returned, which is useful, but it says nothing about whether the caller sees only their own sessions, ordering, pagination, or required permissions for a session-listing tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler. The scope ('active', 'project group') is packed into the opening clause, so nothing needs to be trimmed.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with an output schema that already describes return values, the description covers the essentials. It falls slightly short on filtering scope (whose sessions, active-only definition) but is largely sufficient to invoke correctly.

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% and the single parameter groupName is fully documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no format, casing, or lookup semantics beyond restating that it names a project group.

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 (List) and resource (active sessions) scoped to a project group, so the operation is immediately clear. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from sibling read tools such as query_project_state or get_topology, which an agent might reasonably confuse it with.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives among the many session-related siblings. The agent must infer the trigger condition entirely from the name.

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

Deploy Server