Odile Gate

Read the audit log

gate_audit

Read-only

Returns recent gateway calls (time, app, matched route, status, reason, duration); use it to investigate individual calls across the project rather than gate_metrics aggregates or a single gate_run_timeline. Newest first, with totals by status and refusal reason for the returned calls. This view never returns bodies, query values or headers. For 24-hour totals and anomaly scores use gate_metrics; for a signed export an auditor can check, gate_audit_proof; for one run's history, gate_run_timeline.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "admin_key": "<admin_key>"
    },
    "name": "gate_audit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`app`	No	Optional: only this app id (app_...)
`limit`	No	How many calls (default 20)
`status`	No	Optional: only this HTTP status, e.g. "403"
`admin_key`	Yes	The project admin key (ga_...). Read it from the .env; never print it.
`project_id`	Yes	The project id from gate_create_project, e.g. p1a2b3...

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, but the description still adds real behavioral context: ordering (newest first), the aggregate summary included (totals by status and refusal reason), and a privacy guarantee that bodies, query values and headers are never returned. The only gap is pagination/cursor behavior beyond the limit cap, which is left implicit.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the return shape, then the routing alternatives, then the privacy constraint. No filler and nothing repeated from the schema.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries the return-value burden itself and does so (fields, ordering, totals, exclusions). Combined with the full schema coverage and read-only annotations, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, with app, status, limit, admin_key and project_id all documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add syntax, defaults or interaction rules for those filters beyond what the schema already says.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (returns recent gateway calls) and enumerates the returned fields (time, app, matched route, status, reason, duration). It explicitly distinguishes itself from three siblings, so an agent can tell it apart from gate_metrics, gate_audit_proof and gate_run_timeline without opening any schema.

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?

Names the selection condition ("investigate individual calls across the project") and routes to the correct alternative for each other case: gate_metrics for 24-hour totals and anomaly scores, gate_audit_proof for a signed export, gate_run_timeline for one run's history. Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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

All Odile Gate tools Inspect

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

Need Help?