Skip to main content
Glama

list_assessment_results

List loaded OSCAL Assessment Results with UUID, title, child count, and size so you can choose a query_value for query_assessment_results; results are paged.

Instructions

List loaded OSCAL Assessment Results with UUID, title, child count, and size. Use when picking a query_value for query_assessment_results. 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_results"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum items per page, 1-100.
offsetNoZero-based index of the first item.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 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."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the paged behavior and the summary fields returned, but says nothing about result ordering, total counts, or whether it covers all loaded documents or only a subset.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns before the usage cue. 'Results are paged' slightly duplicates the limit/offset schema but is minor overhead.

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?

For a two-parameter, non-destructive list tool with no output schema, the description names the returned fields and the paging behavior, which is sufficient to call it correctly. Ordering or coverage details would be the only addition worth making.

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% for limit and offset, so the schema already explains pagination parameters. The description's 'Results are paged' adds nothing beyond that baseline.

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 and resource ('List loaded OSCAL Assessment Results') plus the exact fields returned (UUID, title, child count, size), which sets it apart from sibling listers like list_ssps and list_catalogs.

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?

Gives concrete when-to-use guidance ('Use when picking a `query_value` for query_assessment_results'), naming the alternative tool and the condition that selects this one. It stops short of stating when NOT to use it (e.g. when retrieving full result content).

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