Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Server for OSCAL

MCP Server for OSCAL

by dfkunstler
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_ssp_system_components

Lists system components in loaded OSCAL SSPs with UUID, title, and parent document, supporting paged results for compliance exploration.

Instructions

List system components in loaded OSCAL SSPs with UUID, title, and parent document. Get a component'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_ssp_system_components"
  }
}

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

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations present, the description must carry the full burden. It does disclose pagination ("Results are paged") and that results are scoped to loaded SSPs, but says nothing about whether the operation is read-only, how paging metadata is returned, or ordering.

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 the core scope front-loaded, followed by the follow-up tool and the paging note. Nothing is wasted and no sentence repeats another.

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 three-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers output fields, paging behavior, and the pointer to get_child_element for full JSON. Only ordering and permission/read-only context are absent.

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 coverage is 100%, so limit, offset, and parent_doc_uuid are fully documented in the schema. The description adds only the general notion of scoping to loaded SSPs and repeats the parent-document concept, so baseline 3 applies.

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: listing system components restricted to loaded OSCAL SSPs, and names the returned fields (UUID, title, parent document). This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like list_components and list_ssp_control_implementations, though the distinction is implied by the 'SSP' qualifier rather than stated explicitly.

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 a component's OSCAL JSON with get_child_element"), which is useful routing. However, it never says when to choose this over list_components or query_ssp, nor any prerequisite such as an SSP needing to be loaded first.

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