Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
saas-alerts-mcp

saas-alerts-mcp

by am3cramirez
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

saas_alerts_events_scroll

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve additional security event results by providing a scroll ID from a previous query to continue pagination.

Instructions

Continue paginating through a previous event query result set using a scroll ID. Call after saas_alerts_events_query_advanced returns a scroll ID.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "scroll_id": "<scroll_id>"
    },
    "name": "saas_alerts_events_scroll"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scroll_idYesScroll ID returned by a previous query

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read-only nature is clear. The description adds context about the scroll-based pagination mechanism and its dependency on a prior query, going beyond the annotations.

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 consists of two sentences: the first states the action, the second gives the prerequisite. Every word is purposeful and there is no fluff.

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 simple one-parameter pagination tool, the description explains the action and prerequisite clearly. It does not describe the return format, but given the low complexity and existing annotations, this is only a minor gap.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage for scroll_id with a clear description. The tool description reinforces this but adds no new details about the parameter's format or origin, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Continue paginating' and identifies the resource 'previous event query result set'. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly referencing the prerequisite tool 'saas_alerts_events_query_advanced'.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Call after saas_alerts_events_query_advanced returns a scroll ID.' This provides clear timing and prerequisite information, making the selection unambiguous.

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