Skip to main content
Glama
csmediapro

moodle-mcp-server

by csmediapro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

get_user

Fetch a single Moodle user by exact ID, email, or username, returning a structured record with custom profile fields. Provide exactly one identifier.

Instructions

Fetch one Moodle user by exact ID, email, or username. Provide exactly one of id, email, or username. Returns a single structured user record including any custom profile fields.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoExact Moodle user ID
_siloNoINTERNAL: Silo filter injected by agent-edge. Not for direct use.
emailNoExact email address
usernameNoExact Moodle username
presentationNoHow much user detail to display. Use compact for workflow steps and full when explicitly asked for all user details.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / _silo
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "INTERNAL: Silo filter injected by agent-edge. Not for direct use.",
+  "properties": {
+    "field": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "value": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "field",
+    "value"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return shape ('single structured user record including any custom profile fields'), which partially compensates for the missing output schema, but says nothing about permission requirements, behavior when no user matches, or whether the call is read-only.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and lookup keys, followed by the return shape. No filler and every clause carries 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-record lookup with a fully described schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, key selection, and return shape. It lacks error/permission behavior, but nothing critical to making the call correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a real constraint the schema does not express: no parameter is marked required, yet the description mandates exactly one of id/email/username. That is genuine semantic value beyond the schema.

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 (Fetch) and resource (one Moodle user) and names the three lookup keys, with 'exact' implicitly contrasting with the fuzzy search_users sibling. It stops short of naming search_users outright, so an agent must infer the boundary rather than being told.

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?

'Provide exactly one of id, email, or username' is a cardinality constraint rather than usage guidance, and the presentation hint is duplicated from the schema. There is no explicit guidance on when to use this over search_users or list_course_users, so the selection context is only implied.

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