Librus MCP Server

Recipients

get_recipients

Lists the people in a recipient group so you can address a message; set include_virtual=true for modern student or parent groups that contain only virtual accounts.

Instructions

List the people in one recipient group, to address a message. Modern students and parents groups include virtual accounts only with include_virtual=true in recipient_type. On legacy accounts the lookup changes this login's Librus form state. Nothing is sent.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`account_alias`	Yes	Login alias from list_accounts.
`recipient_type`	Yes	A group's reference from get_recipient_types.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes
`backend`	Yes
`context`	Yes
`identity`	Yes
`pagination`	No
`observation`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv2.5.0Oct 29, 2026
- removedOutput schema / $defs / Pagination / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

Changed4 schema fields changedv2.3.1Oct 27, 2026

changedInput schema / $defs / RecipientTypeInput / properties / account / pattern

Previous value: -"^(?:[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f]|[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f](?:[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f]| )*[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f])$"New value: +"^[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f](?: *[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f])*$"

addedInput schema / properties / account_alias / description
```
Added value: +"Login alias from list_accounts."
```

changedInput schema / properties / account_alias / pattern

Previous value: -"^(?:[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f]|[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f](?:[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f]| )*[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f])$"New value: +"^[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f](?: *[^\\s\\x00-\\x1f\\x7f])*$"

addedInput schema / properties / recipient_type / description

Added value: +"A group's reference from get_recipient_types."

First observedOct 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds important context beyond the annotations by disclosing that on legacy accounts the lookup changes this login's Librus form state, and clarifying that nothing is sent. This explains why readOnlyHint is false despite the tool being described as a listing operation. It does not cover auth or rate-limit behavior, but the key side effect is disclosed.

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?

Three sentences with no waste: the core operation is front-loaded, the include_virtual caveat follows, and the legacy side-effect warning closes the description. Each sentence carries distinct operational value.

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?

The tool has an output schema, annotations, and 100% schema description coverage, so the description need not explain return values. It fills the remaining important gaps by covering virtual-account behavior and the legacy form-state side effect.

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 would be 3. The description adds real meaning by explaining that modern student and parent groups include virtual accounts only when include_virtual=true is set inside recipient_type, and it ties legacy accounts to a form-state side effect. This goes beyond the schema's structural documentation.

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 states a specific verb and resource: list the people in one recipient group. It also gives the purpose, addressing a message, which distinguishes it from group-listing siblings such as get_recipient_types. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

The description establishes clear context: it is used for addressing a message and operates on one recipient group supplied via recipient_type. It does not explicitly compare alternatives such as get_recipient_choices or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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