Skip to main content
Glama
CSOAI-ORG

NIS2 Compliance MCP

by CSOAI-ORG
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

classify_incident

Classify cyber incidents against NIS2 Article 23 thresholds to determine significance for mandatory reporting obligations.

Instructions

Classify a cyber incident against NIS2 Article 23 thresholds. Returns whether 'significant' — triggering 24h early warning, 72h incident notification, 1-month final report.

Behavior: This tool is read-only and stateless — it produces analysis output without modifying any external systems, databases, or files. Safe to call repeatedly with identical inputs (idempotent). Free tier: 10/day rate limit. Pro tier: unlimited. No authentication required for basic usage.

When to use: Use this tool when you need to assess, audit, or verify compliance requirements. Ideal for gap analysis, readiness checks, and generating compliance documentation.

When NOT to use: Do not use as a substitute for qualified legal counsel. This tool provides technical compliance guidance, not legal advice.

Args: incident_description (str): The incident description to analyze or process. users_affected (int): The users affected to analyze or process. duration_hours (float): The duration hours to analyze or process. cross_border (bool): The cross border to analyze or process. data_breach (bool): The data breach to analyze or process. financial_loss_eur (float): The financial loss eur to analyze or process. api_key (str): The api key to analyze or process.

Behavioral Transparency: - Side Effects: This tool is read-only and produces no side effects. It does not modify any external state, databases, or files. All output is computed in-memory and returned directly to the caller. - Authentication: No authentication required for basic usage. Pro/Enterprise tiers require a valid MEOK API key passed via the MEOK_API_KEY environment variable. - Rate Limits: Free tier: 10 calls/day. Pro tier: unlimited. Rate limit headers are included in responses (X-RateLimit-Remaining, X-RateLimit-Reset). - Error Handling: Returns structured error objects with 'error' key on failure. Never raises unhandled exceptions. Invalid inputs return descriptive validation errors. - Idempotency: Fully idempotent — calling with the same inputs always produces the same output. Safe to retry on timeout or transient failure. - Data Privacy: No input data is stored, logged, or transmitted to external services. All processing happens locally within the MCP server process.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
incident_descriptionYes
users_affectedNo
duration_hoursNo
cross_borderNo
data_breachNo
financial_loss_eurNo
api_keyNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Tool Definition Quality

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Despite no annotations, the description comprehensively covers read-only, stateless, idempotent nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, and data privacy. No contradictions 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 well-structured with clear sections (behavior, usage, args, transparency) and front-loaded purpose. However, the arg descriptions are repetitive, slightly reducing conciseness.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given no annotations and an output schema present, the description covers behavior, authentication, rate limits, and error handling well. The output format (returning 'significant' status and triggers) is implied but not fully explicit.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the arg descriptions are generic ('The X to analyze or process'), adding minimal meaning beyond parameter names and types. They fail to explain how each parameter influences classification.

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 clearly states the tool classifies cyber incidents against NIS2 Article 23 thresholds and specifies the 'significant' output triggering regulatory timelines. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'classify_entity' or 'audit_article_21' by its incident-specific focus.

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 includes explicit 'When to use' (gap analysis, compliance checks) and 'When NOT to use' (not legal advice) sections, providing clear context and differentiation from alternatives.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/CSOAI-ORG/nis2-compliance-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server