Microsoft Graph MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

get_user

Retrieve details for a specific Microsoft 365 user by ID or user principal name to verify identity, check account properties, or support provisioning workflows.

Instructions

Get details for a specific user

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": {
      "user_id": "<user_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`user_id`	Yes	The user ID or user principal name

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 2, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Get" implies a read, but nothing is said about required permissions, behavior when the user does not exist, or what details are returned — all relevant for a directory lookup tool.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficiently sized, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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?

For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum indicate what 'details' means or how missing users are handled. As written, an agent cannot predict the response shape or failure mode.

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 100% and the user_id description already explains it accepts an ID or UPN, so the description adds nothing beyond it. Baseline 3 is appropriate for a single fully-documented parameter.

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 and resource ("Get details for a specific user"), and "specific" signals a single-entity lookup rather than a listing. However, it never names the obvious siblings search_user or list_users, so an agent must infer that this is the by-ID path.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus search_user or list_users, and no prerequisites stated. The only usable signal is implicit: you need a user_id, which the schema already tells the agent.

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