Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Server for OSCAL

MCP Server for OSCAL

by dfkunstler
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_assessment_plan_tasks

List tasks from loaded OSCAL Assessment Plans, showing UUID, title, and parent document, with paging and optional filtering by parent document UUID.

Instructions

List tasks in loaded OSCAL Assessment Plans with UUID, title, and parent document. Get a task's OSCAL JSON with get_child_element. Results are paged.

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": "list_assessment_plan_tasks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum items per page, 1-100.
offsetNoZero-based index of the first item.
parent_doc_uuidNoUUID of one parent document to scope results to. Omit for all documents.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.7.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Added value: +"Maximum items per page, 1-100."
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset / description
      Added value: +"Zero-based index of the first item."
    • addedInput schema / properties / parent_doc_uuid / description
      Added value: +"UUID of one parent document to scope results to. Omit for all documents."
  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 burden, and it does disclose two useful traits: results are scoped to 'loaded' plans and 'Results are paged.' It omits ordering guarantees, whether an empty result is an error, and any permission requirements, leaving real gaps for a read tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler: what is listed and what fields come back first, the escape hatch to get_child_element second, pagination last. Nothing redundant.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by naming the returned fields plus the pagination behavior, which is enough for a simple three-optional-parameter list tool. Minor gap is the lack of a pointer to sibling listing tools for the parent-plan scope.

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 limit/offset/parent_doc_uuid are already fully documented with defaults and semantics. The description only echoes the parent-document scoping concept and adds no syntax or behavioral detail beyond the schema.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('List tasks in ... Assessment Plans') with the returned fields named (UUID, title, parent document), which separates it from list_assessment_plan_activities and query_assessment_plan. It does not explicitly say how it differs from query_assessment_plan, so not 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?

Clear context: use this to enumerate tasks, and use get_child_element when the full task OSCAL JSON is needed. It stops short of stating when to prefer query_assessment_plan over this list tool, so no explicit exclusions.

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