Skip to main content
Glama
jamesbrink

MCP Server for Coroot

get_risks_overview

Analyze application risk assessment overview to identify high-risk applications, track risk trends over time, and highlight critical issues requiring attention for compliance and security.

Instructions

Get risk assessment overview.

Returns comprehensive risk analysis across all applications:

  • High-risk applications

  • Risk trends over time

  • Critical issues requiring attention

  • Compliance and security risks

Args: project_id: Project ID query: Search/filter query (optional)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes
queryNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler function for 'get_risks_overview'. This is the entry point decorated with @mcp.tool() that defines the tool schema via type hints and delegates to the implementation.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def get_risks_overview(
        project_id: str,
        query: str | None = None,
    ) -> dict[str, Any]:
        """Get risk assessment overview.
    
        Returns comprehensive risk analysis across all applications:
        - High-risk applications
        - Risk trends over time
        - Critical issues requiring attention
        - Compliance and security risks
    
        Args:
            project_id: Project ID
            query: Search/filter query (optional)
        """
        return await get_risks_overview_impl(project_id, query)  # type: ignore[no-any-return]
  • Error-handling wrapper that calls the CorootClient method and formats the response.
    @handle_errors
    async def get_risks_overview_impl(
        project_id: str,
        query: str | None = None,
    ) -> dict[str, Any]:
        """Get risks overview."""
        overview = await get_client().get_risks_overview(project_id, query)
        return {
            "success": True,
            "overview": overview,
        }
  • Core CorootClient method that executes the HTTP GET request to the Coroot API endpoint for risks overview.
    async def get_risks_overview(
        self,
        project_id: str,
        query: str | None = None,
    ) -> dict[str, Any]:
        """Get risk assessment overview.
    
        Args:
            project_id: Project ID.
            query: Search/filter query.
    
        Returns:
            Risk assessment overview data.
        """
        params = {}
        if query:
            params["query"] = query
    
        response = await self._request(
            "GET",
            f"/api/project/{project_id}/overview/risks",
            params=params,
        )
        data: dict[str, Any] = response.json()
        return data
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns comprehensive risk analysis, which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether it requires specific permissions, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or handles errors. The description adds minimal context beyond the basic purpose, leaving significant gaps for a tool that likely accesses sensitive risk data.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the purpose and key return categories. The 'Args' section is structured but could be more integrated. There's minimal waste, though the bulleted list of return items is somewhat verbose. Overall, it's efficient but not perfectly streamlined.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (risk analysis with 2 parameters), no annotations, and an output schema present (which should cover return values), the description is moderately complete. It explains the purpose and parameters briefly but lacks behavioral details (e.g., permissions, rate limits) and usage context. The output schema likely handles return values, so the description's focus on what's returned is adequate but not fully compensatory for other gaps.

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 0%, so the schema provides no parameter details. The description includes an 'Args' section that lists 'project_id' and 'query' with brief notes, adding some meaning (e.g., 'project_id: Project ID' and 'query: Search/filter query (optional)'). However, it doesn't explain the format of 'project_id' (e.g., UUID), what 'query' filters on, or provide examples. This partially compensates but leaves parameters under-documented.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with 'Get risk assessment overview' and elaborates on what it returns (comprehensive risk analysis across applications with specific categories like high-risk applications and trends). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_applications_overview' or 'get_deployments_overview' by focusing on risk analysis. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'update_application_risks', which might be a related mutation tool.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid project_id), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'get_applications_overview' for general app data or 'update_application_risks' for modifying risks. Usage is implied only by the tool's name and description, lacking explicit context.

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/jamesbrink/mcp-coroot'

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