mcp-server-rt

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_group_members

Read-only

List the members of an RT group by its numeric ID. Filter results to users or groups, paginate, and optionally include sub-group members recursively.

Instructions

List the members of a group. RT returns only an id and a type (user or group) per member — this collection ignores a fields parameter, so names cannot be requested. get_group returns the same membership already resolved: a user member carries its username as its id, a group member its numeric id. Use get_group when the user needs members named rather than listed as bare ids.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "list_group_members"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Numeric group ID (RT has no name route for groups)
`page`	No	Page number (default 1)
`users`	No	Only show user members (default: false)
`groups`	No	Only show group members (default: false)
`per_page`	No	Results per page (max 100, default 20)
`recursively`	No	Include members of sub-groups (default: false)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.3.0Sep 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: the API returns only id and type, ignores a fields parameter, and cannot return names. This helps the agent set expectations about the response without needing to call the 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?

The description is three sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then provides the most important limitation and the routing guidance to get_group. Every sentence earns its place and the structure makes the key facts easy to scan.

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 six parameters fully covered by the schema, a readOnly annotation, and no output schema, the description covers the critical non-obvious behavior: fields are ignored and names cannot be requested. It also gives an alternative for the common named-members use case. This is sufficient for a read-only list endpoint, though it does not describe envelope or error details.

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 schema already documents all six parameters. The description does not add per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, though it does clarify a general API limitation around requesting fields. This meets the baseline without exceeding it.

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 description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the members of a group.' It further clarifies the exact output shape (id and type per member) and explicitly contrasts itself with get_group, which resolves member names. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishable from nearby member-related tools.

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 description explicitly states when to prefer an alternative: 'Use get_group when the user needs members named rather than listed as bare ids.' It also explains why list_group_members cannot fulfill that need, giving the agent a clear decision rule for selecting between the two tools.

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