Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Server for OSCAL

MCP Server for OSCAL

by dfkunstler
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

about

Returns server metadata, including package version, keywords, bundled OSCAL version, and loaded document count, to verify configuration and loaded OSCAL content.

Instructions

Return server metadata: package version, keywords, bundled OSCAL version, and the number of documents loaded from OSCAL_DOCUMENTS_DIR.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "about"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the returned fields and implies a read-only metadata operation, but it stops short of explicitly confirming read-only safety, permission requirements, or that no side effects occur.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that lists the returned metadata fields in a compact, scannable form. Every phrase adds information and there is no 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?

There are no parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, so the description must explain the return values. It does exactly that by enumerating version, keywords, bundled OSCAL version, and loaded document count.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to clarify. Baseline 4 is appropriate because the schema is empty and the description correctly does not invent parameters.

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?

States a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('server metadata'), then enumerates exactly which metadata fields are returned. The resource type ('server metadata' vs. OSCAL documents) clearly distinguishes it from the many OSCAL-content sibling tools.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not say whether this should be called before or after other tools, nor does it name any sibling as a related or competing tool.

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