Skip to main content
Glama
csmediapro

moodle-mcp-server

by csmediapro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

search_users

Search Moodle users by first name, last name, email, username, or ID number. Use for direct person lookup; provide at least one search field.

Instructions

Search Moodle users by firstname, lastname, email, username, or idnumber. Use this for direct person lookup, not structured directory filtering or reports. Provide at least one standard Moodle search field. Moodle performs the filtering first; this tool does not preload the full user directory. If a directory listing plugin is installed, prefer that plugin for filter-style requests. If multiple users match, do not guess downstream actions; select the correct user ID first.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_siloNoINTERNAL: Silo filter injected by agent-edge. Not for direct use.
emailNoSearch by email
limitNoMaximum users to return
offsetNoPagination offset applied after Moodle returns matches
idnumberNoSearch by ID number
lastnameNoSearch by last name
usernameNoSearch by username
firstnameNoSearch by first name

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

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it discloses that Moodle performs filtering server-side and that the tool does not preload the full directory, plus a mutation-adjacent caution about not guessing downstream actions. It does not cover auth/permission requirements or rate limits, which keeps it short 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the core verb+resource, then layered with alternatives and cautions in a logical order. It is slightly long with several conditional sentences, but each adds a distinct constraint rather than repeating itself.

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?

An 8-parameter tool with a nested internal _silo object and no output schema, so the description needs to explain behavior; it covers filtering, no-preload, and ambiguous-match handling. It leaves the internal _silo filter unexplained (though the schema marks it INTERNAL) and says nothing about return shape or pagination interaction.

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 enumerated parameters and their meanings are already fully documented in the schema; the description names the standard search fields but adds no syntax, matching semantics, or format detail beyond that. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (Moodle users) plus the exact searchable fields (firstname, lastname, email, username, idnumber), and explicitly distinguishes itself from 'structured directory filtering or reports', routing the agent away from sibling tools like 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.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit when-to-use (direct person lookup), when-not (filter-style requests, for which it names a directory listing plugin as the preferred alternative), a precondition (provide at least one standard search field), and a downstream rule (select the correct user ID rather than guessing). Nothing 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