Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Arrumou Neural

by io.github.brunoreisportela
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Auditoria do aplicativo

list_audit_events
Read-onlyIdempotent

Eventos de auditoria desta autorização (operação, recurso, resultado, correlação).

Escopo: profile:read · Risco: read · Efeitos: Nenhum.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_audit_events"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so 'Risco: read · Efeitos: Nenhum' largely restates them. The one genuine addition is the required authorization scope (profile:read), which annotations do not express, plus the enumeration of returned event fields in lieu of an output schema.

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?

Two short lines, with the resource and scope front-loaded before the metadata line. The scope/risk/effects line is partially redundant with annotations, but it is compact enough not to be a real cost.

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

Completeness3/5

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

There is no output schema, so listing the returned event fields is genuinely useful, and the scope requirement is stated. However, for a list tool with a limit parameter, the absence of any pagination, ordering, or volume guidance leaves a real gap.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The single parameter is `limit` with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions pagination, the default of 50, or the 200 cap. With one undocumented parameter the description should compensate, and it does not.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific resource (audit events) with scope qualifier 'desta autorização' and names the event fields it surfaces (operação, recurso, resultado, correlação). The verb is carried only by the tool name, and it is not distinguished from the closest sibling, get_activity_log.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no reference to any alternative such as get_activity_log, which an agent could easily confuse with this tool. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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

All Arrumou Neural 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