biz.dfch.SpecMgr

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

List risks

list_rsk

List risks from the configured risk base directory, one page at a time, with IDs, titles, statuses, and zone levels, to get context before addressing a specific risk by ID.

Instructions

Ids, titles, statuses, and refs of risks in the configured risk base directory, one page at a time, for context before addressing one by id. Each line also carries the initial/residual 5x5 zone levels, the TARA strategy word, the first ## Scope entry, and the residual-risk coordinates (residual_probability/residual_impact/residual_product). 'ref' is an opaque, extensionless identifier -- not a filename to read from disk -- for documents that have no assigned id; use it with the get_rsk tool instead. An optional glob pattern (e.g. 'dead*') filters the listing to the risks whose id matches it, case-insensitively; glob=None (the default) lists everything, and an empty string matches nothing. max_results/offset control paging (default page size 25, capped at 100); out-of-range values are clamped, not errored.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`glob`	No
`offset`	No
`max_results`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`total`	Yes
`offset`	Yes
`results`	Yes
`truncated`	Yes
`error_count`	No
`max_results`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.36.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses paging defaults (25, capped at 100), that out-of-range offset/max_results are clamped rather than errored, that glob=None lists everything while an empty string matches nothing, that matching is case-insensitive against ids, and that 'ref' is an opaque extensionless identifier rather than a filename. These are exactly the edge cases an agent would otherwise discover by failure.

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 purpose and the paging/filtering semantics are front-loaded, so the agent gets the essentials immediately. The middle sentence enumerating every returned column is dense and slightly run-on, though each element (zone levels, TARA strategy, Scope entry, residual coordinates) is substantive rather than filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values did not need explaining, yet the description still labels the non-obvious columns (zone levels, TARA strategy word, residual_* coordinates) that an agent would otherwise misread. Combined with complete parameter and edge-case coverage, nothing needed to call this tool correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry all three parameters, and it does: glob semantics (optional, case-insensitive id match, example 'dead*', None vs empty-string behavior), and max_results/offset paging with defaults, cap, and clamping behavior. No parameter is left undescribed.

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 first clause names a specific verb (list) and resource (risks in the configured risk base directory) and enumerates the returned fields (ids, titles, statuses, refs). It also carves out the boundary against the sibling get_rsk by stating list output is 'for context before addressing one by id' and that 'ref' should be consumed via get_rsk instead.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives a clear use context ('for context before addressing one by id') and routes the agent to get_rsk for the 'ref' case, which is genuine sibling differentiation. It stops short of an explicit when-not-to-use this tool (e.g. when you already have the id and want full detail), so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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

Deploy Server