Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ESET-MCP

ESET-MCP

by maciekaz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

vuln_vulnerability_management__list_recent_scan_details

Read-onlyIdempotent

List recent vulnerability scan details for all accessible devices or filter results by device or device group.

Instructions

List recent scan details - (GET /v1/scans/recent) - List the scan details of all vulnerability scan attempts performed recently (within the last few days).

The list might be empty if no vulnerability scans have been performed recently. Stale data (that is, not recent) is removed from the list over the course of several days.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoOptional server-side projection: return only these keys for each list-item in the response. Reduces token usage on large list endpoints. Example: ['uuid','displayName']. Top-level fields (e.g. nextPageToken) are always preserved. Not forwarded to ESET - applied locally after fetch.
pageSizeNoLimit for pagination purposes. If unspecified or 0, the default value is 50. The maximum value is 1000; values above 1000 will be coerced to 1000. > **Info:** > For more information, refer to [Paginating Requests in APIs](https://medium.com/@ignaciochiazzo/paginating-requests-in-apis-d4883d4c1c4c) > > or [Design Patterns: Pagination](https://google.aip.dev/158)
pageTokenNoPage token of the current page. If not given or "", the first page is returned. > **Info:** > For more information, refer to [Paginating Requests in APIs](https://medium.com/@ignaciochiazzo/paginating-requests-in-apis-d4883d4c1c4c) > > or [Design Patterns: Pagination](https://google.aip.dev/158)
deviceUuidNoReference to the device whose vulnerability scan details should be listed. If empty or null, vulnerability scan details of all devices accessible to the caller will be included in the response. type: VulnerableDevice
deviceGroupUuidNoReference to the [device group]. If filled, only the vulnerability scan details of the devices within the group will be included in the response. If empty or null, scan details of any device accessible to the caller will be included in the response. type: device_management.v1.DeviceGroup

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld). The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: data retention (stale entries are dropped over several days) and the possibility of an empty list. It does not discuss ordering, pagination behavior, or what a 'scan detail' record contains.

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?

Short and front-loaded, with the core action in the first sentence and retention caveats after. The endpoint path repeats the annotation title ('GET /v1/scans/recent'), which is minor redundancy rather than waste.

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?

For a read-only, fully-optional-parameter list endpoint with no output schema, the description covers purpose, time scope, and empty/retention semantics. Only the shape of a scan detail record and result ordering are left unspecified, which is a modest gap.

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 every parameter including the deviceUuid and deviceGroupUuid filters is already documented in the schema, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds nothing parameter-specific, but the schema does the heavy lifting adequately for a 0-required-parameter list tool.

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 and resource: listing scan details of vulnerability scan attempts performed recently, with a concrete time window ('within the last few days'). It is distinguishable from the vuln_vulnerable_devices siblings (which list vulnerabilities per device), though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied by the temporal framing ('recently', 'last few days') and it warns the result may be empty if no scans occurred. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over list_device_vulnerabilities or list_vulnerable_devices, nor any mention of required permissions or filtering behavior.

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