rock-rms-mcp

search_people

Find people in Rock RMS by name to retrieve their ID, name, age, connection status, and campus.

Instructions

Search for people in Rock RMS by name. Returns slim person summaries (Id, name, age, connection status, campus). Read-only.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "search_people"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`top`	No
`name`	Yes	Full or partial name, e.g. 'John Sm' or 'Smith, John'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Jul 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry behavioral info. It declares 'Read-only' and lists return fields, which is helpful. However, it omits details like result limiting (max 50 via top parameter) and pagination behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose, second states return format and read-only nature. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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 provides useful return fields. It covers the basic purpose and constraints. However, missing details on error handling, result ordering, or when to prefer alternative tools. Adequate for a simple search tool.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 50% (top parameter lacks description). The tool description adds no clarification for top, only repeats 'by name' for the name parameter. It fails to explain the top parameter's purpose or constraints.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches for people in Rock RMS by name, using a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like get_person (which returns full details) and get_group_members (which filters by group).

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description indicates usage when searching by name for slim summaries, but lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance. Sibling tools like get_person or get_group_members are not mentioned.

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

Deploy Server