Aggregate audit statistics by type, actor, resource, severity, and outcome. Optionally filter the aggregation to a specific time range with after and before timestamps.
[audit] Aggregate stats: by_type, by_actor, by_resource, by_severity, by_outcome.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| after | No | ||
| before | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It fails to mention that this is a read-only operation, how data is computed, or any side effects. The description is too minimal.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is extremely concise—one sentence that front-loads the core functionality. No wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite many sibling tools and an output schema, the description lacks parameter explanations, usage guidance, and behavioral context. A complete description would explain parameters and suggest when to use this tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain the parameters 'after' and 'before'. It only lists grouping dimensions, leaving parameter meaning entirely opaque.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it provides aggregate stats grouped by five specific dimensions (type, actor, resource, severity, outcome). This distinguishes it from siblings like audit_audit_log (raw logs) and audit_audit_timeline (time-based).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention filter parameters (after, before) or contrast with other audit tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/0-co/agent-friend'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server