Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AliMail Admin MCP

AliMail Admin MCP

by mfc-open
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

批量获取部门信息

get_departments_by_ids
Read-onlyIdempotent

Batch retrieves department information for up to 100 department IDs; IDs that do not exist are omitted from the results.

Instructions

根据部门 ID 列表批量获取部门信息（最多 100 个），不存在的 ID 不返回。

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": {
      "ids": "<ids>"
    },
    "name": "get_departments_by_ids"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsYes
selectNo透传 $select，如 hasUsers,hasSubDepartments,userCount,managers,email,isHidden,canManage

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds real value by disclosing that non-existent IDs are silently omitted from results—a partial-result behavior not covered by annotations—plus the 100-item cap context.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence packs the resource, mechanism, limit, and edge-case behavior with no wasted wording.

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?

A simple two-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema; the description covers the key edge case (missing IDs) adequately. Slightly light on the select forwarding parameter.

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 50%, with the ids array carrying only constraints and select fully described. The description restates the maxItems limit (最多 100 个) and the not-found behavior for ids, but adds nothing for select, roughly at the baseline for this coverage level.

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-resource pair (批量获取部门信息) and specifies the batch-by-ID mechanism. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like get_department or get_users_by_ids, but the batch nature clearly distinguishes it.

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?

The word 批量 (batch) implies when to use this over a single-department tool, but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance and no named alternative. Usage 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