The Trump administration is demanding that American intelligence officials turn over the names of all foreign espionage targets, including suspected spies and potential recruits, to create a master list that some officials fear will be misused or compromise operations, according to people familiar with the matter.

The effort by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has intensified in recent months, frustrating counterparts at the F.B.I. and C.I.A., who are skeptical of the claims that a master list is necessary to avoid inadvertent conflicts between agencies and to better track foreign intelligence threats in real time. The office was established in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks to streamline coordination among the intelligence agencies.

Senior counterintelligence officials at the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. have so far resisted those demands, the people said, and the effort has been mostly unsuccessful. Officials still cannot agree on the most basic details, including how a list of what are known as foreign intelligence threat actors would be created, maintained and kept secure, the current and former officials said.

The clash also reflects the strained relationship between the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the F.B.I. and C.I.A. after the former director, Tulsi Gabbard, pursued the president’s priorities, including slashing the office’s work force and scrutinizing allegations of election fraud based on flimsy or unfounded claims. With Bill Pulte, a housing official who has no prior intelligence experience, serving as acting director, officials are increasingly wary of how the office might handle such secrets.

For the F.B.I., such a master list of espionage targets would include those the bureau wants to investigate and perhaps someday arrest. For the C.I.A., it would include a significant number of potential assets.

Some current and former intelligence officials fear that assembling identifying details about some of the most sensitive cases may fatally compromise long-running intelligence investigations and operations. The identities of those targets are carefully protected secrets, walled off from most personnel even inside their own agencies.

Asked for comment, an F.B.I. spokesman said the bureau was working with other intelligence agencies “to open the books for the American people in historic ways,” part of what he characterized as a broader push for transparency under its director, Kash Patel.

The C.I.A. declined to comment. A spokeswoman for the office of Mr. Pulte did not return a request for comment.

The government’s definition of foreign intelligence threat actors is deliberately broad, and includes far more than just traditional spies and intelligence service officers from foreign countries. The term usually also encompasses international criminal groups, hackers or foreign corporations and entities, and some of the internal disagreements center on which people should or should not be on such a master list.

Proponents of the plan envision something similar to a watch list for terrorist suspects, one that would allow the U.S. to track their locations around the world in real time by having a host of other agencies sharing information constantly and flagging travel and other movements. To veteran spy hunters, the practical realities of such a program could greatly increase the risk of tipping off the people under investigation, particularly for those who are trained by foreign intelligence services to notice signs of surveillance or investigative interest, according to current and former officials.

Another hurdle is that some of the relevant information has been obtained under the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, and that information is tightly restricted and not meant to be shared.

The push for such a list stems from an initiative from October 2017, under the first Trump administration, when the president signed National Security Presidential Memorandum 7. The directive orders federal agencies to “lawfully identify, integrate and make available thorough, accurate and timely national security threat actor information.”

It also instructs agency chiefs to “maintain and make available evaluated national security threat actor information” within “relevant” secure systems.

Trump administration officials have interpreted the directive to mean that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence should have full access to some of the most sensitive counterintelligence targeting.

But concerns about how the office might handle such information have only mounted now that the office is being led by Mr. Pulte, a Trump loyalist who has shown a willingness to please the president. Mr. Trump has signaled that he wants the agency to aggressively pursue his unfounded claims of fraud in the 2020 election that he lost, and has encouraged his administration to investigate election results that he does not like, such as in the California primary earlier this month.

To date, the disagreement has played out behind closed doors, as officials spar over how much, if at all, to submit to the demands, these people said. Former officials said the effort under Ms. Gabbard was part of a push to exercise oversight over the various parts of the sprawling intelligence community. The reluctance by the F.B.I. and C.I.A., former officials said, showed their longstanding rejection of attempts to oversee their covert or secret programs.

Some officials said they hoped Mr. Pulte would abandon the effort.