Concrete CMS MCP Server

get-users

Read-only

Retrieve Concrete CMS user objects sorted by date added descending, with optional pagination and includes for custom attributes or groups.

Instructions

Returns a list of user objects, sorted by date added descending. The most recent user objects appear first.

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": "get-users"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`after`	No	The ID of the current object to start at.
`limit`	No	The number of objects to return. Must be 100 or less. Defaults to 10.
`includes`	No	includes parameter

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0-alpha.1Aug 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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 useful behavioral context by specifying the sort order and that the newest users appear first, but it says nothing about pagination behavior, default page size, or rate limits beyond what the schema states.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loaded, but the second sentence ('The most recent user objects appear first') merely restates the sorting detail already given in the first sentence. It is not harmful, but it does not earn its place.

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 simple, read-only list endpoint with fully described parameters and no output schema, the description supplies the key ordering behavior an agent needs. The remaining gaps (pagination mechanics, filtering) are already covered by the schema, so the description is reasonably complete.

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 the after cursor, the limit cap, and the includes options. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that baseline and does not clarify the weak 'includes parameter' schema text.

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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource: it 'Returns a list of user objects,' and adds a meaningful ordering detail (date added descending). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling get-user-by-id.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer get-user-by-id versus this list endpoint, and no guidance on pagination or filtering. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name and schema.

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