Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
healthsec-mcp

healthsec-mcp

by MichaelEnny
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_audit_log

Retrieve the audit trail of all authorization decisions made during the current session, recording both granted and denied tool calls.

Instructions

Return this session's audit trail.

    Every authz-gated tool call (run_fgsm, run_boundary_attack,
    run_membership_inference) is recorded here, whether it was
    authorized or denied.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_audit_log"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns a record of tool calls with authorization decisions, implying no side effects. Could be more explicit about being read-only, but sufficient for a simple retrieval.

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 very concise sentences with front-loaded core purpose. Every sentence adds value: 'Return this session's audit trail' and details what is recorded. No wasted words.

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?

The description is simple but lacks details about the return structure (e.g., fields in each entry). Given no output schema, more detail on the audit trail format would improve completeness. However, for a parameterless tool, it adequately conveys the basic function.

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

Parameters4/5

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

No parameters exist, so baseline 4 applies. The description adds no parameter info, which is acceptable since none are needed.

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?

The description clearly states the tool returns the session's audit trail and specifies exactly what is recorded (authz-gated tool calls with authorization status). It is a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes itself from siblings.

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 description implies usage: get the raw audit log for session. It does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives like score_audit_completeness, but the purpose is clear. Lacks explicit when-not or alternative recommendations.

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