Skip to main content
Glama
industrial-aiops

OT-AIops

uns_live_audit

Read-only

Capture live MQTT topic traffic from an industrial broker, then audit topic naming conformance and sprawl to close the UNS governance loop.

Instructions

[READ][risk=low] Capture the LIVE UNS topic tree (bounded) then audit it.

Closes the governance loop: subscribes to a live broker, collects up to
``max_msgs`` messages or until ``duration_s`` (whichever first), then runs the
naming-conformance + topic-sprawl audit over the observed topics. Never an
open-ended loop.

Args:
    endpoint: Endpoint name from config (protocol must be 'mqtt').
    topic: Topic filter to capture under (default '#').
    duration_s: Capture window in seconds (1..60, capped server-side).
    max_msgs: Max messages to capture (1..500, capped server-side).
    allowed_roots: Permitted top-level segments; others are flagged (optional).
    min_segments: Minimum namespace depth a well-formed topic must have.
    max_leaf_parents: A leaf under more than this many parents is scattered.

Returns dict: the uns_topic_audit result (topic_count, depth, verdict, findings)
    plus capture:{endpoint, topic, observed_messages, unique_topics, topics[]}.

Example: uns_live_audit(topic="factory/#", duration_s=8, allowed_roots=["factory"]).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicNo#
endpointNo
max_msgsNo
duration_sNo
min_segmentsNo
allowed_rootsNo
max_leaf_parentsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: subscribes to a live broker, collects up to max_msgs or duration_s (bounded), and runs naming-conformance + topic-sprawl audit. It does not contradict annotations.

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 well-structured: a header line, a paragraph on governance loop, an Args list, Returns, and an Example. It is somewhat lengthy but every sentence adds value. Could be slightly more concise, but overall effective.

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?

The description covers all aspects: behavior, parameters, return format (including nested dict shape), and provides an example. Since there is no output schema, the description's explanation of the return dict is essential and well-provided.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter in the Args section, including bounds (e.g., duration_s: 1..60 capped, max_msgs: 1..500 capped), their purpose (e.g., allowed_roots: 'Permitted top-level segments; others are flagged'), and a usage example.

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 clearly states 'Capture the LIVE UNS topic tree (bounded) then audit it', specifying the action (capture + audit), the resource (LIVE UNS topic tree), and the bounded nature. It distinguishes from sibling tools like uns_topic_audit (offline audit) by emphasizing live capture.

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?

The description explains the tool's role: 'Closes the governance loop' and describes the capture-then-audit process. It clarifies the tool is not an open-ended loop. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives (e.g., uns_topic_audit for offline audits).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/industrial-aiops/industrial-aiops'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server