Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Microsoft Active Directory MCP Server

Microsoft Active Directory MCP Server

by nks1097
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

ad_list_users

Lists Active Directory users with configurable filters for search base, enabled status, and result limits to support directory audits and administration.

Instructions

[Users] [READ] Listar usuarios com filtros configuraveis.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ad_list_users"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
search_baseNo
enabled_onlyNo
correlation_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden; the '[READ]' tag hints at read-only behavior but that is a naming convention, not a disclosed trait. It says nothing about result limits, pagination, permission requirements, or whether large directories are truncated.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

It is a single short sentence, front-loaded with the resource and read tag, so nothing is wasted. But the brevity comes at the cost of specification rather than being lean-but-complete.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, but with no annotations, 0% parameter documentation, and a nearby sibling (ad_search_users) that overlaps in purpose, the definition leaves too much for the agent to guess.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% across four parameters, and the description only vaguely refers to 'configurable filters' without naming limit, search_base, enabled_only, or correlation_id. The agent must infer meaning from bare parameter names, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Listar usuarios') and notes filtering exists, so the operation is identifiable. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling ad_search_users, leaving ambiguity about which listing tool to choose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of ad_search_users or ad_get_user, nor on prerequisites such as required directory permissions. The phrase 'filtros configuraveis' gestures at use cases without saying what they are.

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