Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Chronary

Chronary

Official
by Chronary
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_audit_log

Read-onlyIdempotent

List an organization's audit-log entries for mutating operations and auth-lifecycle events, newest first, with time, action, actor, and pagination filters. Requires an org-level API key.

Instructions

List audit-log entries for the calling org — mutating operations and auth-lifecycle events, newest first. Results are clamped to the plan's retention window. Requires an org-level API key (chr_sk_*); agent-scoped keys cannot read the org-wide audit log.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoEnd of the window (ISO 8601)
fromNoStart of the window (ISO 8601). Silently clamped to the plan retention window if older.
limitNoMax results to return (default 50)
actionNoFilter by action name (e.g. event.created)
cursorNoOpaque pagination cursor from a previous response
actor_key_prefixNoFilter by the API key prefix that performed the action

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / from / pattern
      Previous value: -"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$"New value: +"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d:[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$"
    • changedInput schema / properties / to / pattern
      Previous value: -"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$"New value: +"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d:[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$"
  2. First observedv1.2.5

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real value: results are clamped to the plan's retention window, event ordering, and an auth constraint that isn't derivable from annotations. It stops short of describing pagination or return shape.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the resource/scope front-loaded and the auth constraint placed last as a gating condition. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a read-only list tool with no output schema, it covers scope, ordering, retention clamping, and auth requirements. It could say more about the response shape or pagination, but nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so from/to/limit/action/cursor/actor_key_prefix are already documented. The description only reinforces the retention-clamping behavior already noted in the 'from' param description, adding no new parameter semantics.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (audit-log entries), scoped to 'the calling org', and enumerates the content (mutating operations and auth-lifecycle events) plus ordering (newest first). No sibling covers audit logging, so the agent can distinguish this immediately.

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?

Provides a concrete usage precondition: it requires an org-level API key (chr_sk_*) and explicitly excludes agent-scoped keys. That is strong when/when-not guidance, though it names no alternative tool for the agent-scoped case.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools