Skip to main content
Glama
dragosh29

Edays MCP server

by dragosh29
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

List users

list_users
Read-only

Retrieve Edays employee records, returning partner IDs, names, job titles, leave flags, and schedules. Filter by name or partner ID; omit leavers and contact details unless requested.

Instructions

Employees on this Edays system with partner_id (the key other tools take), name, job title, leaver flag, settings template, start dates, FTE and hours per day. GET /api/v2/users is not marked as paged in the documentation; the whole list is fetched (following the edays-pagination-* headers page by page if the system does page it) and filtered locally: query matches part of the name or partner ID, and leavers are skipped unless asked for. Contact and HR details (email, login, phones, address, next of kin, date of birth, payroll and employee numbers, pay) only with include_contact_details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoCase-insensitive fragment of the person's name or partner ID
max_resultsNoMaximum number of users to return
include_leaversNoInclude users flagged IsLeaver
include_contact_detailsNoInclude email, login, home and work phones and emails, address, next of kin, date of birth, payroll and employee numbers, SSO and client-provided IDs and annual pay, and stop redacting email addresses, phone numbers and UK postcodes typed into names and other text

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnly and openWorld; the description adds critical behavior: pagination handling, local filtering semantics, leaver default, and conditional PII redaction. These details go well beyond the annotations.

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 returned data fields, then behavioral constraints. The second sentence is dense but each clause earns its place; there is minor verbosity in the contact-detail parenthesis.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, so the description must carry return-value context; it lists the fields and conditional contact details, and explains pagination and filtering. Sufficient for an agent to call correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description reinforces query and include_leavers behavior but adds little parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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?

It names the specific resource (employees on the Edays system) and enumerates many exact fields returned, including partner_id and its role as the key other tools use. This clearly distinguishes it from single-user siblings like get_user.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It explains local filtering, leaver exclusion, and when contact details are included, giving clear usage context. However, it never explicitly names an alternative tool (e.g., get_user for one employee) or states when not to use this list endpoint.

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