Retrieve the full list of ClickUp workspace members when you need to verify people or manage membership, not for automatic assignee lookup.
List all members in the workspace. Most tools resolve assignees automatically — use only when you need the full member list.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workspace_id | No | Workspace ID (digits only). Only needed when you have multiple workspaces. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the read-only nature implicitly through 'List all members' and names the workflow constraint, but says nothing about pagination, permissions, or what member fields come back. For a simple read tool that is acceptable but not rich.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the usage caveat immediately after. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-required-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers what it is and when to use it. The only minor gap is not characterizing the member records returned, which is largely inferable from the tool name.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% and the single workspace_id parameter is fully documented there, including 'only needed when you have multiple workspaces'. The description adds no parameter guidance beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Specific verb plus resource ('List all members in the workspace') with scope made explicit. It distinguishes itself from the assignee-resolution siblings by saying those resolve automatically and this is only for the full member list.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly states the when-not: most tools resolve assignees automatically, so use this only when the full member list is needed. That is a clear routing rule that steers the agent away from this tool in the common case.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.