Skip to main content
Glama
MarkAC007

mcp-server-scf

by MarkAC007
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

scf_list_systems

Read-only

List an organization's systems with boundary, criticality, RTO/RPO, data classification, and hosting details, then filter by linked vendor or boundary decision.

Instructions

List the organization's systems with boundary and recovery record (in_scope, criticality, RTO/RPO hours, data classification, hosting). Filter by linked vendor or boundary decision.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
org_idYesOrganization UUID — obtain from scf_list_organizations
in_scopeNoFilter by assessment boundary: 'true' (inside), 'false' (outside) or 'undecided' (not recorded)
vendor_idNoFilter to systems structurally linked to this vendor UUID — obtain from scf_list_vendors

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv3.7.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / in_scope
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filter by assessment boundary: 'true' (inside), 'false' (outside) or 'undecided' (not recorded)",
+  "enum": [
+    "true",
+    "false",
+    "undecided"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv1.7.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotation already declares readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral value by disclosing which data the records expose (boundary, criticality, recovery, classification, hosting). It is silent on permissions, pagination, and ordering, so it is adequate but not rich.

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 compact sentences, the resource and its payload front-loaded, filtering detail second. No filler or redundant restatement of the name.

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?

With no output schema, the description reasonably compensates by naming the fields each returned system carries. Combined with the fully covered input schema, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only return shape, ordering and pagination remain unaddressed.

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 org_id, in_scope and vendor_id are already fully documented with formats and obtain-from pointers. The description's filter mentions merely echo the schema's in_scope/vendor_id semantics without adding syntax or edge-case guidance, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List the organization's systems') and enumerates the record fields carried back (in_scope, criticality, RTO/RPO, classification, hosting), which is far beyond a tautology. It stops short of naming the adjacent siblings it must be told apart from (scf_get_system, scf_list_system_catalog), so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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?

The closing sentence gives filtering context ('Filter by linked vendor or boundary decision'), which implies how it is used but never says when to reach for this list versus scf_list_system_catalog or scf_get_systems_for_evidence. Usage is implied, not stated.

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