Skip to main content
Glama

list_poams

List loaded OSCAL Plans of Action and Milestones with UUID, title, child count, and size to choose a query_value for query_poam; results are paged.

Instructions

List loaded OSCAL Plans of Action and Milestones with UUID, title, child count, and size. Use when picking a query_value for query_poam. 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_poams"
  }
}

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

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose that this is a listing operation, what fields are returned, and that results are paged. It does not elaborate on permissions, total counts, or exact pagination defaults, but the schema covers the pagination parameters.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the resource and returned fields, then the usage guidance. There is no wasted text.

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 simple two-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description gives enough context: what is listed, what fields come back, why to use it, and that paging applies. Minor gaps around when to choose the sibling list tool remain.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so `limit` and `offset` are already fully documented. The description only adds that results are paged, which is useful context but not additional parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: listing loaded OSCAL Plans of Action and Milestones. It also names the returned fields (UUID, title, child count, size), so the agent can tell this is a document-level list rather than an item query.

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?

It gives a clear use case: picking a `query_value` for `query_poam`, which directly connects this tool to its sibling. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name `list_poam_items` as an alternative, leaving some routing ambiguity.

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