Skip to main content
Glama
CSOAI-ORG

SOC2 Compliance AI MCP

Official

risk_assessment

Identify and assess SOC 2 risks using AICPA guidelines. Evaluates system descriptions and service commitments to map risks to control requirements.

Instructions

SOC 2 risk assessment per AICPA guidelines. Identifies risks to Trust Service Criteria, assesses likelihood and impact, and maps to specific SOC 2 control requirements.

Args: system_description: Description of the service organization and its systems service_commitments: System Description service commitments (SLAs, security guarantees) known_risks: Already identified risks to evaluate ai_specific: Whether to include AI-specific risk factors caller: Caller identifier for rate limiting tier: Access tier (free/pro)

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. 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
tierNofree
callerNoanonymous
api_keyNo
ai_specificNo
known_risksNo
system_descriptionYes
service_commitmentsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully covers behavioral aspects: read-only, stateless, idempotent, rate limits (free/pro tiers), authentication (no auth for basic, API key for higher tiers), error handling, and data privacy. No contradictions with annotations since none exist.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Well-structured with clear sections (Overview, Args, Behavior, When to use/not use, Behavioral Transparency). Every sentence adds value; no redundancy. Appropriate length given the tool's complexity.

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?

Comprehensive for a complex tool with 7 parameters, 2 required, and an output schema. Covers purpose, parameters, behavior, usage guidelines, and edge cases. Output schema presence means return values need not be described.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description's 'Args' section explains all 7 parameters with meaningful context. Missing api_key is later clarified in Behavioral Transparency as environment variable, ensuring full 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?

Description clearly states the tool performs 'SOC 2 risk assessment per AICPA guidelines' and specifies its actions: identify risks, assess likelihood and impact, map to controls. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'control_gap_analysis' or 'assess_trust_principles' which have different focuses.

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?

Includes explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, advising use for compliance assessment and cautioning against legal advice substitution. However, it does not directly compare with sibling tools or specify when to choose this over 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/soc2-compliance-ai-mcp'

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