Skip to main content
Glama
DynamicEndpoints

Microsoft 365 Core MCP Server

manage_cis_compliance

Idempotent

Assess and remediate CIS benchmark compliance for Microsoft 365 environments, track security controls, and generate compliance reports.

Instructions

Manage CIS (Center for Internet Security) benchmark compliance including assessment and remediation tracking.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesCIS compliance action
benchmarkNoCIS benchmark to assess
implementationGroupNoImplementation group
controlIdsNoSpecific control IDs
scopeNoAssessment scope
settingsNoAssessment settings

Implementation Reference

  • The primary handler function for the 'manage_cis_compliance' tool. Dispatches to specific CIS operations like assessment, reporting, remediation based on args.action.
    export async function handleCISCompliance(
      graphClient: Client,
      args: CISComplianceArgs
    ): Promise<{ content: { type: string; text: string }[] }> {
      let result: any;
    
      switch (args.action) {
        case 'assess':
          // Perform CIS compliance assessment
          result = await performCISAssessment(graphClient, args);
          break;
    
        case 'get_benchmark':
          // Get CIS benchmark information
          result = await getCISBenchmark(args.benchmark || 'office365');
          break;
    
        case 'generate_report':
          // Generate CIS compliance report
          result = await generateCISReport(graphClient, args);
          break;
    
        case 'configure_monitoring':
          // Configure CIS monitoring
          result = await configureCISMonitoring(args);
          break;
    
        case 'remediate':
          // Execute automated remediation
          result = await executeCISRemediation(graphClient, args);
          break;
    
        default:
          throw new McpError(ErrorCode.InvalidParams, `Invalid action: ${args.action}`);
      }
    
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }] };
    }
  • Zod schema defining the input parameters for the 'manage_cis_compliance' tool, used for validation and MCP discovery.
    export const cisComplianceSchema = z.object({
      action: z.enum(['assess', 'get_benchmark', 'generate_report', 'configure_monitoring', 'remediate']).describe('CIS compliance action'),
      benchmark: z.enum(['windows-10', 'windows-11', 'windows-server-2019', 'windows-server-2022', 'office365', 'azure', 'intune']).optional().describe('CIS benchmark to assess'),
      implementationGroup: z.enum(['1', '2', '3']).optional().describe('Implementation group'),
      controlIds: z.array(z.string()).optional().describe('Specific control IDs'),
      scope: z.object({
        devices: z.array(z.string()).optional().describe('Target devices'),
        users: z.array(z.string()).optional().describe('Target users'),
        policies: z.array(z.string()).optional().describe('Target policies'),
      }).optional().describe('Assessment scope'),
      settings: z.object({
        automated: z.boolean().optional().describe('Automated assessment'),
        generateRemediation: z.boolean().optional().describe('Generate remediation plans'),
        includeEvidence: z.boolean().optional().describe('Include evidence'),
        riskPrioritization: z.boolean().optional().describe('Risk-based prioritization'),
      }).optional().describe('Assessment settings'),
    });
  • MCP server tool registration for 'manage_cis_compliance', linking schema, metadata hints, and the wrapped handler function.
      "manage_cis_compliance",
      "Manage CIS (Center for Internet Security) benchmark compliance including assessment and remediation tracking.",
      cisComplianceSchema.shape,
      {"readOnlyHint":false,"destructiveHint":false,"idempotentHint":true},
      wrapToolHandler(async (args: CISComplianceArgs) => {
        this.validateCredentials();
        try {
          return await handleCISCompliance(this.getGraphClient(), args);
        } catch (error) {
          if (error instanceof McpError) {
            throw error;
          }
          throw new McpError(
            ErrorCode.InternalError,
            `Error executing tool: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : 'Unknown error'}`
          );
        }
      })
    );
  • TypeScript interface defining the structure of arguments for CIS compliance operations, used by the handler.
    export interface CISComplianceArgs {
      action: 'assess' | 'get_benchmark' | 'generate_report' | 'configure_monitoring' | 'remediate';
      benchmark?: 'windows-10' | 'windows-11' | 'windows-server-2019' | 'windows-server-2022' | 'office365' | 'azure' | 'intune';
      implementationGroup?: '1' | '2' | '3';
      controlIds?: string[];
      scope?: {
        devices?: string[];
        users?: string[];
        policies?: string[];
      };
      settings?: {
        automated?: boolean;
        generateRemediation?: boolean;
        includeEvidence?: boolean;
        riskPrioritization?: boolean;
      };
    }
  • Tool metadata providing description, title, and behavioral annotations for the 'manage_cis_compliance' tool.
    manage_cis_compliance: {
      description: "Manage CIS (Center for Internet Security) benchmark compliance including assessment and remediation tracking.",
      title: "CIS Compliance Manager",
      annotations: { title: "CIS Compliance Manager", readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false, idempotentHint: true, openWorldHint: true }
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-destructive, idempotent, non-read-only tool, which the description doesn't contradict. The description adds context about 'assessment and remediation tracking' activities, which helps clarify the tool's behavioral scope beyond the annotations. However, it doesn't provide details about rate limits, authentication needs, or specific outcomes of actions like 'remediate'.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core functionality, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a tool with 6 parameters, rich schema documentation, and no output schema, the description provides basic purpose but lacks important context. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how different actions affect the system, or how it relates to sibling compliance tools. The annotations help with safety profile, but more behavioral context would be valuable given the tool's complexity.

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%, with all parameters well-documented in the schema itself. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain relationships between parameters or provide usage examples). This meets the baseline expectation when schema coverage is complete.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose as managing CIS benchmark compliance with specific activities (assessment and remediation tracking). It uses the verb 'manage' with the resource 'CIS benchmark compliance', which is specific. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'manage_compliance_assessments' or 'manage_compliance_frameworks', which appear to be in the same domain.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or specific contexts for use. With multiple sibling tools in the compliance domain (e.g., manage_compliance_assessments, manage_compliance_frameworks), this lack of differentiation is a significant gap.

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/DynamicEndpoints/m365-core-mcp'

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