Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cognigy-ai-mcp-management-server

cognigy-ai-mcp-management-server

by TsvetanG2
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussions(1)Admin
TypeScript

list_audit_events

Read-onlyIdempotent

List Cognigy.AI audit events to track user changes to flows, intents, endpoints, and other resources for compliance and debugging.

Instructions

Lists Cognigy.AI audit events. Audit events track all changes made to resources (flows, intents, endpoints, etc.) by users. Useful for compliance and debugging.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
skipNoNumber of items to skip for pagination
userNoFilter by the user who performed the action (as shown in the event's 'user' field)
limitNoMaximum number of events to return (default: 25, max: 100)
eventTypeNoFilter by event type (e.g., 'create', 'update', 'delete')
projectIdNoFilter audit events by project ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.2.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / endDate
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "End date for audit events (ISO 8601 format)",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / resourceType
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Filter by resource type (e.g., 'flow', 'intent', 'endpoint')",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • removedInput schema / properties / startDate
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Start date for audit events (ISO 8601 format)",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / user
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filter by the user who performed the action (as shown in the event's 'user' field)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / userId
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Filter audit events by user ID",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  2. First observedv0.1.4

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds domain context (events track changes by users to flows, intents, endpoints), but discloses nothing beyond that about filtering, ordering, or result limits.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and each sentence adds something (identity, semantics, use case). No waste or redundancy.

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 a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description supplies enough context to invoke it correctly. It could add a note about default page size or ordering, but nothing essential 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 all five parameters (skip, user, limit, eventType, projectId) are already fully documented in the schema with defaults and bounds. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline 3 case.

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 and resource ('Lists Cognigy.AI audit events') and explains what an audit event is, so the agent understands the domain. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the singular sibling get_audit_event, but the plural 'list' form makes the distinction inferable.

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?

'Useful for compliance and debugging' gives implied usage context, satisfying the minimum bar for a 3. It does not state when to prefer this over get_audit_event for a single event, nor any prerequisites or filtering guidance.

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