Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Server for OSCAL

MCP Server for OSCAL

by dfkunstler
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_profile_modify

Lists the modify element (control tailoring) for each loaded OSCAL profile, with paged results and optional scoping to a parent document.

Instructions

List the modify element (control tailoring) of loaded OSCAL Profiles, one per profile. Get its 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_profile_modify"
  }
}

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

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that output is paged and one entry per profile, which is genuinely useful, but it omits read-only confirmation, whether unloaded profiles are skipped, and what an item contains.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and immediately followed by the practical next step. No filler, though the phrasing "List the modify element ... one per profile" is slightly redundant with itself.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should describe what a listed item looks like (uuid, parent document) so the agent knows what to pass to get_child_element. It gestures at that with "Get its OSCAL JSON with get_child_element" but leaves the item shape implicit.

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, and parent_doc_uuid are already fully documented. The description's only added signal is "Results are paged," which corroborates limit/offset but adds no new semantics.

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 ("List the modify element ... of loaded OSCAL Profiles") and narrows scope with "one per profile." This distinguishes it from the broader list_profiles and from list_profile_imports, though it never explicitly contrasts with query_profile.

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?

The follow-up path is spelled out ("Get its OSCAL JSON with get_child_element"), which tells the agent this is a summary/index step rather than a detail fetch. However, there is no guidance on when to choose this over query_profile or list_profiles, and no stated preconditions (e.g. profiles must already be loaded).

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