list_usersRetrieve Drupal user accounts with filters, sorting, and pagination to browse directories or find specific users by criteria.
List users with filters and pagination.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sorts | No | ||
| filters | No | ||
| page_limit | No | ||
| page_offset | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions filters and pagination but does not say whether this is a read-only operation, whether it requires specific permissions, how pagination behaves by default, or any rate or safety characteristics.
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?
The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though arguably too terse for a four-parameter tool where the schema provides no parameter descriptions.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage across four parameters, the description does not provide enough context to call the tool correctly, particularly regarding sorting and filter structure.
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 0%, so the description must compensate. It gestures at 'filters' and 'pagination', partially covering filters and page_limit/page_offset, but omits the sorts parameter entirely and gives no filter syntax or format guidance.
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?
The description states a clear verb+resource ('List users') and adds scope via 'filters and pagination'. It does not distinguish this tool from sibling user tools like get_user or search-oriented list tools, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_user, get_user_by_email, or other user-related listing tools. The description merely states what it does, leaving usage context entirely to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.