Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
TiFlux MCP Server

TiFlux MCP Server

Official
by tiflux
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

search_user

Search users by name to assign as ticket responsible. Filter by type, status, and paginate results.

Instructions

Buscar usuarios no TiFlux por nome para usar como responsavel em tickets

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "search_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesNome do usuario a ser buscado (busca parcial)
typeNoTipo de usuario (client, attendant, admin)
activeNoFiltrar usuarios ativos (true) ou inativos (false)
limitNoNumero de resultados por pagina (padrao: 20, maximo: 200)
offsetNoNumero da pagina (padrao: 1)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.3.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It implies a read-only search but does not disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, pagination details, or that it returns user data. Minimal beyond schema.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple search tool but lacks information about return values and how results relate to the intended use case. Given no output schema, this is a gap.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context about the use case but no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., partial search for name).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool searches users by name in TiFlux for the specific purpose of assigning them as responsible for tickets. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_client and search_stage.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives a clear context: to find users to set as ticket responsible. However, it does not explicitly exclude other uses or compare to alternatives like search_client.

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