list_account_usersRetrieve a list of users for any Canvas account. Filter by name, email, or login to locate specific users.
List users in a Canvas account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account_id | Yes | The Canvas account ID | |
| search_term | No | Search users by name, email, or login |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.18.11Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"v1.18.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the account scope; it does not disclose pagination, result shape, or any other behavioral traits beyond what is already structured.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes the essential scope, making it easy to parse quickly.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only list with fully documented parameters and safety annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema and no mention of pagination or what user fields are returned, an agent has limited information about the actual response.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented. The description adds no additional meaning about account_id or search_term beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high coverage.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific operation: list users, scoped to a Canvas account. It is clear about the resource and scope, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as search_users or list_course_users.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No usage guidance is provided. There is no indication of when to choose this tool over search_users or list_course_users, nor any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the schema.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.