Skip to main content
Glama
qpiai

Zoho Projects MCP Server

by qpiai

list_users

Retrieve user lists from Zoho Projects for portal administration or project team management. Specify project ID to filter results.

Instructions

List users in a portal or project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idNoProject ID (optional for portal-level)

Implementation Reference

  • Core handler function for the 'list_users' MCP tool. Determines the Zoho Projects API endpoint based on optional project_id (portal-level if absent), fetches user data, and returns it as a MCP-formatted text content block with JSON stringification.
    private async listUsers(projectId?: string) {
      const endpoint = projectId
        ? `/portal/${this.config.portalId}/projects/${projectId}/users`
        : `/portal/${this.config.portalId}/users`;
      const data = await this.makeRequest(endpoint);
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2) }],
      };
    }
  • Core handler function for the 'list_users' MCP tool (HTTP server variant). Determines the Zoho Projects API endpoint based on optional project_id (portal-level if absent), fetches user data, and returns it as a MCP-formatted text content block with JSON stringification.
    private async listUsers(projectId?: string) {
      const endpoint = projectId
        ? `/portal/${this.config.portalId}/projects/${projectId}/users`
        : `/portal/${this.config.portalId}/users`;
      const data = await this.makeRequest(endpoint);
      return {
        content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2) }],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:529-540 (registration)
    Tool registration in ListToolsRequestSchema response, defining name, description, and input schema for 'list_users'.
      name: "list_users",
      description: "List users in a portal or project",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          project_id: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Project ID (optional for portal-level)",
          },
        },
      },
    },
  • Tool registration in ListToolsRequestSchema response, defining name, description, and input schema for 'list_users' (HTTP server variant).
      name: "list_users",
      description: "List users in a portal or project",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          project_id: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Project ID (optional for portal-level)",
          },
        },
      },
    },
  • Input schema definition for the 'list_users' tool, specifying optional project_id parameter.
    inputSchema: {
      type: "object",
      properties: {
        project_id: {
          type: "string",
          description: "Project ID (optional for portal-level)",
        },
      },
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states what the tool does but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires specific permissions, pagination behavior, rate limits, or what the output format looks like. For a listing tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic function.

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, efficient sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple listing tool and front-loads the essential information. Every word earns its place in conveying the scope and resource.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity (listing operation with one optional parameter) and no annotations or output schema, the description provides basic completeness by stating what it does and the context. However, it lacks details about behavioral aspects, output format, or integration with sibling tools, which would be helpful for an agent to use it correctly in a broader workflow.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'project_id' documented in the schema as optional for portal-level operations. The description adds marginal value by reinforcing the portal/project context mentioned in the schema description. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline is 3 even without additional parameter details in the description.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('users'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes between portal-level and project-level listing by mentioning 'in a portal or project', which provides useful context. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_portals' or 'list_projects' beyond the resource type.

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 description implies usage context by mentioning 'portal or project', suggesting this tool is for listing users within those scopes. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'search' (which might handle user queries) or clarify if this is the primary user listing method versus other potential user-related tools. No explicit when-not-to-use or prerequisite information is provided.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/qpiai/zoho-projects-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server