Skip to main content
Glama
CSOAI-ORG

NIS2 Compliance MCP

management_body_checklist

Assess management body accountability and personal liability under NIS2 Article 20. Identify compliance gaps and generate readiness documentation for directors.

Instructions

NIS2 Article 20 — management body accountability checklist. Directors can be held personally liable.

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: 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
api_keyNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The `management_body_checklist` tool handler. It is decorated with @mcp.tool(), checks access via check_access(), and returns a JSON object with NIS2 Article 20 governance/accountability checklist including directive info, personal liability, required training, a detailed checklist, and failure consequences.
    @mcp.tool()
    def management_body_checklist(api_key: str = "") -> str:
        """NIS2 Article 20 — management body accountability checklist. Directors can be held personally liable.
    
        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:
            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.
        """
        allowed, msg, tier = check_access(api_key)
        if not allowed:
            return json.dumps({"error": msg})
        return json.dumps({
            "directive": "NIS2 Article 20 — Governance",
            "accountability": "Management bodies of essential and important entities must: (a) approve the cybersecurity risk-management measures taken, (b) oversee their implementation, (c) be held liable for infringements.",
            "personal_liability": "National law may impose personal liability on managers. Several Member States (e.g., Germany) have already transposed this broadly.",
            "required_training": "Members of management bodies MUST undergo regular cybersecurity training sufficient to: identify risks, assess risk-management practices, understand impact on services.",
            "checklist": [
                "Documented approval of cybersecurity risk-management policies (dated, signed by management body)",
                "Quarterly management-body review of cybersecurity posture (documented minutes)",
                "Annual cybersecurity training completion records for all management-body members",
                "Documented training curriculum covering NIS2 Article 21 measures",
                "Incident-response role for management body defined (Article 23 escalation)",
                "Independent assurance (internal audit or external) of Article 21 measures",
                "Register of management-body decisions on risk acceptance",
                "Escalation path for significant incidents to management body documented",
            ],
            "failure_consequences": "Non-compliance with Article 20 can lead to: temporary suspension of certification/authorisation, temporary prohibition from management functions, public disclosure of infringement.",
        }, indent=2)
  • server.py:456-456 (registration)
    The tool is registered as an MCP tool via the @mcp.tool() decorator on line 456 of server.py. No explicit schema is defined beyond the function signature and docstring.
    @mcp.tool()
  • The check_access helper function used within management_body_checklist to gate access based on API key. It imports from auth_middleware or uses a fallback.
        from auth_middleware import check_access as _shared_check_access
        _AUTH_ENGINE_AVAILABLE = True
    except ImportError:
        _AUTH_ENGINE_AVAILABLE = False
        def _shared_check_access(api_key: str = ""):
            if _MEOK_API_KEY and api_key and api_key == _MEOK_API_KEY:
                return True, "OK", "pro"
            if _MEOK_API_KEY and api_key and api_key != _MEOK_API_KEY:
                return False, "Invalid API key. Get one at https://meok.ai/api-keys", "free"
            return True, "OK", "free"
    
    
    def check_access(api_key: str = ""):
        return _shared_check_access(api_key)
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It includes a dedicated 'Behavioral Transparency' section covering side effects (read-only, no side effects), authentication, rate limits, error handling, idempotency, and data privacy. This is comprehensive and fully informs the agent.

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 and front-loaded purpose. However, there is slight redundancy between the initial 'Behavior' paragraph and the later 'Behavioral Transparency' section, which could be merged for 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 the output schema exists, the description needn't detail return values. It covers input, behavior, usage, and limitations. Lacks only deeper context about the checklist content, but overall sufficient for agent selection and invocation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for its only parameter (api_key). The description merely repeats 'api key to analyze or process', adding minimal value. It fails to explain the key's purpose, source, or format, which is insufficient for a parameter with no schema description.

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 provides a checklist for NIS2 Article 20 management body accountability, using a specific verb ('assess, audit, verify'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like audit_article_21 and classify_entity by focusing on this specific compliance aspect.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use (gap analysis, compliance documentation) and when not to use (substitute for legal counsel). However, it does not mention when to prefer this over specific siblings, missing a chance for clearer differentiation.

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