Skip to main content
Glama
dtkmn

MCP ZAP Server

by dtkmn
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Hybrid

zap_scan_history_export

Export OWASP ZAP scan history as inline JSON text for internal evidence processing, returning entries with internal IDs, paths, and metadata. No export file is created.

Instructions

Export scan history as inline JSON text for internal evidence processing; no export file is created. Use zap_scan_history_list for a readable listing, zap_scan_history_release_evidence for a summary bundle, or zap_scan_history_customer_handoff for a customer-facing summary. Returns version, generatedAt, retentionDays, entryCount, and entries containing scan/job/artifact records, including internal IDs, paths, and metadata; review before sharing. Only records accessible to the caller in the current workspace are included, newest first. Omitted or blank filters select all accessible records; supplied filters combine with AND. The snapshot is capped by limit, has no pagination, and returns an empty entries array when nothing matches. It does not start scans or contact targets. Querying may delete expired stored ledger entries under the configured retention policy; it does not refresh scan outcomes from ZAP.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoPositive maximum number of entries. Omission uses the configured export maximum (500 by default); larger values are capped to that maximum. Zero or negative values are rejected.
statusNoOptional case-insensitive exact status filter: queued, running, succeeded, failed, or cancelled for jobs; started for direct scans; generated for reports. Omit or leave blank for all statuses.
targetNoOptional case-insensitive substring of the target URL, target display name, or artifact location, e.g. api.example.com. Omit or leave blank for all targets.
evidenceTypeNoOptional case-insensitive exact type filter: scan_job, scan_run, or report_artifact. Omit or leave blank for all types.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.14.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / evidenceType / description
      Previous value: -"Optional evidence type filter: scan_job, scan_run, or report_artifact"New value: +"Optional case-insensitive exact type filter: scan_job, scan_run, or report_artifact. Omit or leave blank for all types."
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Optional maximum entries to export, bounded by server configuration"New value: +"Positive maximum number of entries. Omission uses the configured export maximum (500 by default); larger values are capped to that maximum. Zero or negative values are rejected."
    • changedInput schema / properties / status / description
      Previous value: -"Optional status filter"New value: +"Optional case-insensitive exact status filter: queued, running, succeeded, failed, or cancelled for jobs; started for direct scans; generated for reports. Omit or leave blank for all statuses."
    • changedInput schema / properties / target / description
      Previous value: -"Optional target or artifact substring filter"New value: +"Optional case-insensitive substring of the target URL, target display name, or artifact location, e.g. api.example.com. Omit or leave blank for all targets."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the surprising destructive side effect ('querying may delete expired stored ledger entries under the configured retention policy'), that no file is created, that there is no pagination and results are capped by limit, that it does not start scans or contact targets, and that it does not refresh outcomes from ZAP.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and the no-file caveat, then alternatives, then return shape and behavioral caveats. Every sentence carries information, though the enumerated return fields and the alternate-tool list make it longer than strictly necessary.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the return keys (version, generatedAt, retentionDays, entryCount, entries) and warning that entries contain internal IDs and paths. Combined with the filter semantics and the retention side effect, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly and warn the user.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the per-parameter semantics are already documented, making 3 the baseline. The description adds cross-parameter behavior the schema cannot express: omission/blank semantics for all filters, AND-combination of supplied filters, the limit cap, and the empty-array result when nothing matches.

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 (export) and resource (scan history), specifies the output form (inline JSON text, no file created), and names the three sibling tools it is not. An agent can distinguish it from zap_scan_history_list, zap_scan_history_release_evidence, and zap_scan_history_customer_handoff without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent: readable listing -> zap_scan_history_list, summary bundle -> release_evidence, customer-facing summary -> customer_handoff, internal evidence processing -> this tool. Also states when filters apply ('omitted or blank filters select all accessible records; supplied filters combine with AND').

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