Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Maplith

by com.maplith
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List findings

list_findings
Read-only

List the documented data problems of this workspace: cross-system discrepancies with evidence, recommendation and lifecycle status, optionally filtered by status. Use it for the discrepancy catalogue; use list_signals for new work and changes since a timestamp, and fetch finding:<finding_key> for one finding you already hold a key for. finding_key stays stable across rescans (ids are per run). The list is complete unless truncated is true. After a scan whose own investigation found nothing, empty_scan says so: found_none_of_its_own when the scan produced no finding at all, findings_kept_from_previous_scan when the previous scan's findings were kept open with the statuses people gave them, so what you read is not this scan's news. A finding's decision says where its work stands; approved: a person approved its fix. A status is changed with update_finding_status.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusNoOnly findings in this state: open (not yet addressed), planned (someone plans to address it), automated (an automation handles it), dismissed (judged not a problem here), approved (a person approved the fix). Omit for every status.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Previous value: -"Only findings in this state: open (not yet addressed), planned (someone plans to address it), automated (an automation handles it), dismissed (judged not a problem here). Omit for every status."New value: +"Only findings in this state: open (not yet addressed), planned (someone plans to address it), automated (an automation handles it), dismissed (judged not a problem here), approved (a person approved the fix). Omit for every status."
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "open",
-  "planned",
-  "automated",
-  "dismissed"
-]New value: +[
+  "open",
+  "planned",
+  "automated",
+  "dismissed",
+  "approved"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Added value: +"Only findings in this state: open (not yet addressed), planned (someone plans to address it), automated (an automation handles it), dismissed (judged not a problem here). Omit for every status."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly and non-destructive annotations, the description explains list completeness via truncated, the meaning of empty_scan values after a scan finds nothing, and the stability of finding_key versus per-run ids. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs to interpret results correctly.

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?

The description is front-loaded with purpose and sibling routing, then covers key stability, truncation, empty_scan, and status mutation. It is dense but mostly earns its length; the decision/approved sentence slightly overlaps with the status enum documentation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining return semantics, and it does: completeness/truncation, empty_scan cases, finding key stability, and the lifecycle meaning of status and decision. An agent has enough context to call the tool and interpret its output.

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 the status enum and its meanings are already fully documented in the schema. The description only adds that the filter is optional, which is already implied by the schema; it does not add syntax or format details beyond that.

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 states a specific verb and resource: list documented data problems of the workspace, defined as cross-system discrepancies with evidence, recommendation, and lifecycle status. It also distinguishes this catalogue tool from list_signals and fetch, so an agent can select it without opening sibling schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly names alternatives and the conditions that select them: list_signals for new work and changes since a timestamp, fetch for one known finding key, and update_finding_status for changing status. This is clear when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else guidance.

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

All Maplith toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources