Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Server for OSCAL

MCP Server for OSCAL

by dfkunstler
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_oscal_schema

Retrieve the JSON or XML schema (XSD) for a specific OSCAL model to understand its properties, types, and required fields.

Instructions

Return the JSON schema or XML Schema (XSD) of one OSCAL model as text.

Use when you need the structure of an OSCAL model: its properties, types, and required fields.

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": {
      "model_name": "<model_name>"
    },
    "name": "get_oscal_schema"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
model_nameYesOSCAL model name from list_oscal_models, or "complete" for all models (very large).
schema_typeNo"json" returns the JSON schema as JSON text; "xsd" returns the XML Schema.json

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.7.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / model_name / default
      Removed value: -"complete"
    • addedInput schema / properties / model_name / description
      Added value: +"OSCAL model name from list_oscal_models, or \"complete\" for all models (very large)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / schema_type / description
      Added value: +"\"json\" returns the JSON schema as JSON text; \"xsd\" returns the XML Schema."
    • addedInput schema / properties / schema_type / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "json",
+  "xsd"
+]
    • addedInput schema / required
      Added value: +[
+  "model_name"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the load, and it does disclose the return is raw text (not a parsed object) and that it exposes properties/types/required fields. It omits any warning that certain models are enormous, permission requirements, or response size behavior — the 'very large' note lives only in the schema. Adequate but thin for a zero-annotation tool.

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?

Two short sentences, purpose front-loaded, zero filler. Every clause carries information an agent can act on.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be re-explained, and parameters are fully covered by the schema. The only residual gap is behavioral context (size/permissions) for a tool with no annotations, which is minor here given it is a read-only retrieval.

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 both model_name and schema_type are fully documented in the schema, including the 'complete' special value and the json/xsd enum. The description adds no parameter detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Return the JSON schema or XML Schema (XSD) of one OSCAL model as text'), and the scope is precisely bounded to one model. It does not explicitly differentiate from near-neighbors like get_metaschema_source or get_definition, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

'Use when you need the structure of an OSCAL model: its properties, types, and required fields' gives clear situational context. No exclusions or named alternatives are provided, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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