Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Stratos

Stratos

by h4cd0c
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

azure_analyze_logic_apps

Identify and assess security issues in Azure Logic Apps: authentication, access control, managed identity, exposed endpoints, and workflow triggers.

Instructions

Logic Apps security analysis: authentication, access control, managed identity usage, exposed endpoints, workflow triggers security

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "subscriptionId": "<subscriptionId>"
    },
    "name": "azure_analyze_logic_apps"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
subscriptionIdYesAzure subscription ID
resourceGroupNoOptional: Filter by specific resource group
formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (default, human-readable) or 'json' (machine-readable)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.15.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description should disclose behavior. It mentions 'security analysis' but does not clarify if the tool is read-only, whether it requires specific permissions, or what actions it performs (e.g., scanning, listing, checking).

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose. It is efficient with no wasted words.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain what the analysis output looks like, what prerequisites are needed, or how the results are structured.

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 the parameters are already well-documented in the schema. The description does not add additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states it performs security analysis of Logic Apps, listing specific areas like authentication and access control. However, it does not differentiate itself from many sibling tools that also perform security analysis on other Azure services.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it's for Logic Apps security assessment, but lacks when-not or alternative tool references.

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