Skip to main content
Glama
ComplianceCow

ComplianceCow MCP Server

get_dashboard_common_controls_details

Retrieve Common Control Framework dashboard details for a specific compliance period to monitor control status, compliance levels, and priorities with filtering and pagination support.

Instructions

Function accepts compliance period as 'period'. Period donates for which quarter of year dashboard data is needed. Format: Q1 2024. Use this tool to get Common Control Framework (CCF) dashboard data for a specific compliance period with filters. This function provides detailed information about common controls, including their compliance status, control status, and priority. Use pagination if controls count is more than 50 then use page and pageSize to get control data pagewise, Once 1st page is fetched,then more pages available suggest to get next page data then increase page number. Args: - period (str): Compliance period for which dashboard data is needed. Format: 'Q1 2024'. (Required) - complianceStatus (str): Compliance status filter (Optional, possible values: 'COMPLIANT', 'NON_COMPLIANT', 'NOT_DETERMINED"). Default is empty string (fetch all Compliance statuses). - controlStatus (str): Control status filter (Optional, possible values: 'Pending', 'InProgress', 'Completed', 'Unassigned', 'Overdue'). Default is empty string (fetch all statuses). - priority (str): Priority of the controls. (Optional, possible values: 'High', 'Medium', 'Low'). Default is empty string (fetch all priorities). - controlCategoryName (str): Control category name filter (Optional). Default is empty string (fetch all categories). - page (int): Page number for pagination (Optional). Default is 1 (fetch first page). - pageSize (int): Number of items per page (Optional). Default is 50.

Returns: - controls (List[CommonControlVO]): A list of common controls. - id (str): Unique identifier of the control. - planInstanceID (str): ID of the associated plan instance. - alias (str): Alias or alternate name for the control. - displayable (str): Flag or content that indicates display eligibility. - controlName (str): Name of the control. - dueDate (str): Due date assigned to the control. - score (float): Score assigned to the control. - priority (str): Priority level of the control. - status (str): Current status of the control. - complianceStatus (str): Compliance status of the control. - updatedAt (str): Timestamp when the control was last updated. - page (int): Current page number in the paginated result. - totalPage (int): Total number of pages available. - totalItems (int): Total number of control items. - error (Optional[str]): An error message if any issues occurred during retrieval.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
periodYes
complianceStatusNo
controlStatusNo
priorityNo
controlCategoryNameNo
pageNo
pageSizeNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
controlsNo
pageNo
totalPageNo
totalItemsNo
errorNo
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses default behaviors (empty strings fetch all, default pageSize 50) and pagination logic beyond what annotations provide.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Structured with clear Args/Returns sections but contains a typo ('donates' vs 'denotes'), verbose repetition of return fields already defined in output schema, and awkwardly phrased pagination instructions.

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?

Comprehensive coverage of 7 parameters, pagination logic, and return structure appropriate for the tool's complexity, though return field details are redundant given the output schema.

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?

Excellent compensation for 0% schema coverage by providing enum values for complianceStatus, controlStatus, priority, format examples for period, and default value explanations for all parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states it retrieves Common Control Framework (CCF) dashboard data with filters, distinguishing it from general dashboard tools via specific 'CCF' terminology.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Provides specific pagination guidance (use when >50 items) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus siblings like fetch_controls or get_dashboard_data.

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/ComplianceCow/cow-mcp'

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