Skip to main content
Glama
WYRE-AI

avanan-legacy-mcp

by WYRE-AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

avanan_search_emails

Search secured emails and SaaS objects by platform and date range, applying optional filters like sender, subject, or quarantine status to locate specific security events.

Instructions

Search secured entities (emails and SaaS objects) by platform and date range, with optional attribute filters (fromEmail, subject, recipients, isQuarantined, attachmentMd5, ...).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
saasYesSaaS platform, e.g. office365_emails, google_mail, office365_onedrive, slack, ms_teams.
scopesNoMSP keys only: restrict to these farm:tenant scopes (see avanan_list_scopes).
endDateNoEnd of the time frame (ISO 8601). Defaults to now.
filtersNoAttribute filters, ANDed together.
scrollIdNoPagination scroll ID from a previous response.
startDateYesStart of the time frame (ISO 8601).
saasEntityNoSaaS entity type, e.g. office365_emails_email.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.3.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that this is a read-only search, what the response contains, whether results are paginated, or any limitations. 'Search' implies reading but does not explicitly disclose behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently communicates the core action, resource scope, and optional filters in a compact form.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves out what the search returns, pagination behavior, and when to prefer this over sibling search/query tools. The schema covers parameters, but the overall calling context is incomplete.

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 the baseline is 3. The description's mention of platform, date range, and filters aligns with schema properties but adds no deeper semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a clear verb ('Search') and a resource ('secured entities (emails and SaaS objects)') with platform, date range, and filters. It is distinguishable from get/list siblings by its broad search semantics, though 'secured entities' is slightly generic.

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?

No guidance is given for when to use this tool instead of related tools like avanan_query_events or avanan_get_email. There are no alternatives, exclusions, or contextual triggers described.

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