Redmine MCP Server

redmine_get_user

Fetch detailed Redmine user information by specifying the user ID, optionally including associated groups and memberships.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific user

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "redmine_get_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	User ID
`include`	No	Additional data to include: memberships, groups

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.3.0Aug 14, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does not mention what 'detailed information' includes, how errors are handled (e.g., invalid ID), whether authentication is required, or the effect of the 'include' parameter on the response. The description is purely declarative without behavioral detail.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word earns its place. Despite being minimal, it is appropriately sized for a straightforward get operation.

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

Completeness2/5

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

While the tool is simple, the absence of an output schema means the description should clarify what 'detailed information' entails. It does not mention the response structure, the behavior of the 'include' parameter, or error conditions. This leaves the agent with incomplete information for invoking the tool successfully.

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?

The input schema fully describes both parameters (id and include) with clear descriptions, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate per the rubric.

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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves detailed information for a specific user, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('specific user'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like redmine_list_users (which lists users) and redmine_get_current_user (which targets the authenticated user).

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like redmine_list_users or redmine_get_current_user, nor does it explain the optional 'include' parameter for extending the response. There is no context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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