Skip to main content
Glama

list_teams

Read-only

Lists every team in an organization so agents can identify team structure before managing members or access. Requires an org on Kiln Business.

Instructions

List every team in org_id.

Needs the organisation to be on Kiln Business.

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": {
      "org_id": "<org_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_teams"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
org_idYesThe org whose teams are listed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / org_id / description
      Added value: +"The org whose teams are listed."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the entitlement prerequisite (Kiln Business plan), which is exactly the kind of non-schema behavior an agent needs before calling. It omits any statement about pagination or admin permissions, keeping it shy of a 5.

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 short sentences with zero filler; the scope is front-loaded and the prerequisite follows immediately. Nothing in the text could be removed without losing 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?

For a single-parameter read-only listing with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the one hidden constraint an agent could not infer. It would be stronger if it noted whether results are complete or paged, but that is a minor gap.

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 org_id is already documented as 'The org whose teams are listed.' The description's 'in *org_id*' restates that without adding format, source, or validation detail, so the schema carries the load.

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 every team') plus the scoping parameter (org_id), which is enough to identify the operation. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling list_my_teams, which an agent could easily confuse with it.

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?

The description gives a real eligibility condition (the org must be on Kiln Business), which tells the agent when the call will succeed. It gives no guidance on when to prefer this over list_my_teams or list_team_members, so routing between siblings is left to inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools