Skip to main content
Glama

arg-tables

Explore Azure Resource Graph tables to understand their structure and usage for querying Azure resources efficiently.

Instructions

Overview of common Azure Resource Graph tables, their purpose, and typical use cases.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for the 'arg-tables' tool: returns a predefined list describing common Azure Resource Graph (ARG) tables and their purposes.
    if name == "arg-tables":
        overview = [
            "Azure Resource Graph Tables",
            "",
            "resourcecontainers: Subscription and resource group metadata. Inventory by scope: list subs/rgroups, tags, locations.",
            "resourcecontainerchanges: Historical changes at subscription/resource group level. Auditing additions/deletions/updates.",
            "resources: All deployed Azure resources. Core inventory: counts, types, locations, tags, SKUs.",
            "resourcechanges: Historical changes at resource level. Troubleshoot drift and unexpected modifications.",
            "advisorresources: Azure Advisor recommendations. Cost, performance, HA, security best practices.",
            "healthresources: Service/Resource Health events. Outages, degraded services, maintenance impacts.",
            "policyresources: Azure Policy compliance state. Non-compliant resources and policy details.",
        ]
        return [types.TextContent(type="text", text="\n".join(overview))]
  • Registration of the 'arg-tables' tool within the list_tools() function, including its name, description, and empty input schema.
    types.Tool(
        name="arg-tables",
        description="Overview of common Azure Resource Graph tables, their purpose, and typical use cases.",
        inputSchema={
            "type": "object",
            "properties": {},
            "required": [],
        },
    ),
  • Input schema for the 'arg-tables' tool: no required properties.
    inputSchema={
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {},
        "required": [],
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. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, rate limits, or what the output format might be. The description is too high-level to provide meaningful transparency for tool invocation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that clearly states the tool's high-level purpose without unnecessary details. It's appropriately sized for a no-parameter tool, though it could be more front-loaded with specific action verbs.

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?

Given the complexity of Azure Resource Graph and lack of annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'overview' entails, the format of the output, or how it integrates with sibling tools, leaving gaps for effective tool use.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't add parameter semantics, but this is acceptable given the lack of parameters, aligning with the baseline for 0 parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool provides an 'overview of common Azure Resource Graph tables, their purpose, and typical use cases,' which gives a general purpose but lacks specificity. It doesn't clearly distinguish this from sibling tools like 'arg-examples' or 'run-arg-kql,' which might also involve Azure Resource Graph tables, making the purpose somewhat vague.

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?

The description mentions 'typical use cases,' implying some context, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'arg-examples' or 'run-arg-kql.' There's no guidance on prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios, leaving usage unclear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/andrewstephenson-v1/Azure-Assistant-MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server