Skip to main content
Glama
koda-ai-studio

agent-bom

by koda-ai-studio
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

Compliance Posture

compliance
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve security control posture from persisted tenant evidence, or scan local MCP configurations and label results for framework and control review.

Instructions

Return compliance posture with its source: the tenant's persisted evidence, or a labelled local scan.

    With completed scans in the control plane, ``summary`` is exactly
    ``/v1/compliance/summary``; ``framework`` adds ``/v1/compliance/{framework}``
    and ``control`` pages the driving finding ids from
    ``/v1/findings?framework=&control=``. Otherwise (or with
    source='local_scan') it scans local MCP configurations and labels that scope.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
imageNoLocal scan only: Docker image to scan, e.g. 'nginx:1.25'.
limitNoDriving finding ids per page.
cursorNodriving_findings.next_cursor from the previous page.
sourceNoauto: persisted tenant evidence when it exists, else a labelled local scan. persisted / local_scan force one.auto
controlNoPersisted only: page the finding ids driving this control.
frameworkNoPersisted only: add one framework's controls, e.g. 'soc2'.
tenant_idNoTenant scope for persisted compliance. Defaults to 'default'.default
config_pathNoLocal scan only: MCP client config directory. Auto-discovers if omitted.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv1.0.12
    • changedInput schema / properties / config_path / description
      Previous value: -"Path to MCP client config directory. Auto-discovers all if omitted."New value: +"Local scan only: MCP client config directory. Auto-discovers if omitted."
    • addedInput schema / properties / control
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "maxLength": 64,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Persisted only: page the finding ids driving this control.",
+  "title": "Control"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / cursor
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "maxLength": 512,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "driving_findings.next_cursor from the previous page.",
+  "title": "Cursor"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / framework
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "maxLength": 64,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Persisted only: add one framework's controls, e.g. 'soc2'.",
+  "title": "Framework"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / image / description
      Previous value: -"Docker image to scan, e.g. 'nginx:1.25'."New value: +"Local scan only: Docker image to scan, e.g. 'nginx:1.25'."
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 50,
+  "description": "Driving finding ids per page.",
+  "maximum": 500,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "title": "Limit",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / source
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "auto",
+  "description": "auto: persisted tenant evidence when it exists, else a labelled local scan. persisted / local_scan force one.",
+  "enum": [
+    "auto",
+    "persisted",
+    "local_scan"
+  ],
+  "title": "Source",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / tenant_id
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "default",
+  "description": "Tenant scope for persisted compliance. Defaults to 'default'.",
+  "title": "Tenant Id",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv0.88.4
  3. Removedv0.88.1
  4. Addedv0.87.1
  5. Removedv0.87.0
  6. Changed1 schema field changedv0.85.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  7. Addedv0.84.5

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only, idempotent, open-world profile, so the description is not carrying the safety burden. It adds real behavioural context beyond that: the auto/persisted/local_scan resolution rule, that local results are labelled by scope, and that framework/control only apply to the persisted path.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence is well front-loaded, but the rest is dense with internal REST paths such as ``/v1/compliance/summary`` and ``/v1/findings?framework=&control=`` that an agent does not need in order to choose or call the tool. It also refers to ``summary``, which is not a parameter name, creating ambiguity about whether these are inputs or output fields.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and coverage for the 8 parameters is complete. The mode-selection logic is explained well; only the absence of sibling routing guidance and the missing mention of a local-scan cost/side-effect profile keep it short of full completeness.

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 a 3 is the baseline, but the description goes further by tying parameters together (framework adds one framework's controls, control pages the finding ids driving it, cursor derives from driving_findings.next_cursor) and by restricting framework/control to persisted mode. That is meaningfully more than the per-parameter schema text.

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+resource: return compliance posture, and explicitly names the two modes (persisted tenant evidence vs. a labelled local scan). This differentiates it reasonably from scan/check siblings, though it never names those siblings directly to say which to prefer.

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?

Gives clear conditional guidance: with completed scans in the control plane the result comes from persisted evidence, otherwise (or when source='local_scan') it falls back to scanning local MCP configurations. It lacks any exclusion against the sibling tools (check, scan, policy_check), which is the main gap.

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