Skip to main content
Glama
dfkunstler

MCP Server for OSCAL

by dfkunstler
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_mapping_collection_mappings

List mappings within OSCAL Mapping Collection documents to see how controls from one framework relate to another. Optionally scope by parent document UUID and paginate results.

Instructions

List mapping elements within OSCAL Mapping Collection documents.

Mappings describe how controls from one framework relate to controls in another framework. Each mapping is identified by a UUID.

Args: ctx: MCP server context (injected automatically). parent_doc_uuid: Optional UUID to scope results to a single mapping collection document. offset: Zero-based pagination offset (default 0). limit: Maximum items to return, 1-100 (default 10).

Returns: Page_Response dict with keys: items, total, offset, limit, hasMore. Each item contains: id, title, element_type, description, parentDocumentTitle, parentDocumentUuid.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
offsetNo
parent_doc_uuidNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, but description discloses pagination behavior and return format. It implies a read-only operation without side effects, though no explicit mention of side effects or prerequisites.

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?

Description is well-structured with docstring style, front-loads purpose, and provides necessary details without excessive verbosity. Could be slightly shorter but not excessive.

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?

All parameters documented, return structure described, no output schema needed for a list endpoint. Complete for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 0%, but description fully explains each parameter: parent_doc_uuid for scoping, offset and limit for pagination. Adds meaning beyond schema field names and types.

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?

Description explicitly states it lists mapping elements within OSCAL Mapping Collection documents, explains what mappings are, and distinguishes from sibling tool list_mapping_collections which lists collections themselves.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Description is clear about what the tool does, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. The context is implied but not stated.

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