workday-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List your team

workday_get_team

Read-onlyIdempotent

List every person on the teams you manage—including names, worker IDs, roles, and locations—so you can look up reviews, feedback, or worker details by ID.

Instructions

List the people on the teams you manage — every supervisory organization you lead, with each member's name, worker id, profile link, position and location. Pass a member's workerId to workday_get_reviews, workday_get_feedback or workday_get_worker. Read-only.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "workday_get_team"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.2.0Oct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description's 'Read-only' is largely redundant. It does earn credit by enumerating the returned fields (name, worker id, profile link, position, location), which matters since there is no output schema. It omits whether indirect/matrix reports are included and whether results are paginated.

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?

Roughly two sentences plus a short routing clause, with the scope statement front-loaded and no filler. Every clause carries information: scope, returned fields, follow-up consumption.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description correctly compensates by listing the returned attributes and the follow-up tools that consume workerId. It is slightly incomplete on scope semantics (subordinate org depth) and result volume, which an agent planning a call would want.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description goes slightly beyond by explaining that workerId is an output field the agent can feed into three named sibling tools, clarifying the data flow after the call.

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 and resource ('List the people on the teams you manage') and scopes it to 'every supervisory organization you lead', which tells an agent this is a roster of direct reports orgs, not the whole org. It doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling 'workday_get_team_snapshot', which is the closest alternative, so it falls short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: the agent can infer 'call this to see who is on your team'. The second sentence gives useful downstream routing (pass workerId to workday_get_reviews/get_feedback/get_worker), but there is no when-to-use-this-vs-snapshot guidance and no exclusions.

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