Skip to main content
Glama

squirrelscan

by com.squirrelscan

List audits

list_audits
Read-only

List the organization's audit runs: currently active (pending/running) plus recent runs of any status. Pass website_id (from list_websites) to get one website's full audit history, oldest runs included, and page through it with limit/offset using the returned total/has_more. This is the way to reach the preserved reports of a soft-deleted website: its runs still list under its old website_id. total/has_more describe the recent array only, and recent already includes any pending/running run, so active is a live view of those same runs and not extra items to add to the count. Use the run ids with get_audit_status or get_report, and website ids with list_issues. Numbers on a recent run come from its published report (#1700): health_score is that report's overall score (the same value as get_report's summary.healthScore; null when the site was blocked or down, which earns no grade) and issues_found is the report's failing + warning checks (its summary.failed + summary.warnings). health_score is the metric to compare run over run: it is the only one rescored consistently across the whole site. Do NOT compare issues_found with the open count from list_issues: the issue tracker folds a rule failing on many pages into one open issue and carries issues forward until they are re-checked, so its count is legitimately much smaller and moves independently.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMax recent runs to return (default 20, max 100).
offsetNoPagination offset into the recent runs (default 0). Use with total/has_more.
website_idNoOnly return runs of this website (id from list_websites, run_audit, or add_website). Works for soft-deleted websites too.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag readOnlyHent=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds substantial behavioral detail: active vs recent semantics, total/has_more describing only the recent array, health_score nullability for blocked/down sites, and issues_found sourced from the published report. No contradiction with annotations.

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 dense and front-loaded with the core purpose. It is longer than strictly necessary and includes an internal reference (#1700) that may not be meaningful to all agents, but most sentences earn their place by conveying behavior or routing guidance.

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?

Even with no output schema, the description explains the meaningful return concepts (active, recent, total, has_more, health_score, issues_found) and their relationships. It also covers pagination, soft-deleted access, and cross-tool usage, making it effectively complete for a listing operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description goes beyond the schema: it explains that website_id works for soft-deleted sites, that limit defaults to 20 and offset to 0, that total/has_more apply only to recent, and that health_score echoes get_report's summary.healthScore. This materially improves parameter understanding.

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 opens with a clear verb-resource statement: it lists the organization's audit runs (active plus recent of any status). It then distinguishes itself from related operations such as get_audit_status, get_report, and list_issues by explicitly saying where run ids and website ids should be used.

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?

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: pass website_id for full per-site history, use limit/offset for pagination, reach soft-deleted websites’ preserved reports through this tool, and route run ids/website ids to specific sibling tools. It leaves little ambiguity about alternatives.

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

All squirrelscan toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool maps to a distinct resource-action pair: websites, audits, issues, rules, credits, notifications, and account info are cleanly separated. Even the close pairs (delete_website vs delete_websites, get_rule vs list_rules) are clear singular/bulk or fetch-all vs fetch-one distinctions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: add_, delete_, get_, list_, run_, comment_, send_, create_. The only outlier, whoami, is a conventional standalone command and does not break the overall predictability.

Tool Count4/5

At 20 tools, the surface is slightly heavy, but the count is justified by the wide domain coverage: audit lifecycle, issue tracking, rule catalog, billing/credits, notifications, and account management. Each tool appears to earn its place, and none feel redundant.

Completeness4/5

The core workflow is well covered: run an audit, poll it, fetch a report, compare audits, list and comment on issues, browse rules, and manage websites. Minor gaps exist—no cancel-audit tool, no update_website, and issues cannot be status-changed—but agents can work around these using the existing tools.

Resources