Skip to main content
Glama

Build nested field hierarchy

arkime_spigraphhierarchy
Read-only

Build a nested top-N hierarchy across Arkime fields for drill-down analysis, returning a treemap structure with counts per level.

Instructions

Build a nested top-N hierarchy across Arkime fields (a treemap / drill-down).

    Returns a nested hierarchy (level 1 -> its top level-2 values -> ...),
    matching Arkime's SPI-graph hierarchy view. Unlike malcolm_aggregate's
    flat multi-field buckets and arkime_multiunique's flat tuple list, the
    result is nested. For a single field plus a time graph use
    arkime_spigraph; for a source/destination graph use arkime_connections.
    Returns the raw Arkime spigraph-hierarchy response (nested value tree).

    Level 1 is the outermost, and every deeper level's top values are
    counted inside their own parent rather than globally, so a value that
    is common overall can be missing from a branch where it is rare. Each
    level keeps Arkime's top 20 and this tool does not expose that number:
    measured on Malcolm v26.07.1, a two-level tree returned 20 first-level values
    out of the 112 the window held, each parent carrying a different number
    of children. An empty tree with no time range usually means the data
    predates Arkime's default recent window: pass time_from.
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsYesComma-separated Arkime fields defining the hierarchy levels in order, e.g. "source.ip,destination.ip,destination.port".
time_toNoEnd time as EPOCH SECONDS (NOT a dateparser string). Empty = now.
time_fromNoStart time as EPOCH SECONDS (NOT a dateparser string). Empty = Arkime's recent-only default.
expressionNoOptional Arkime expression syntax to scope the data. Empty = all sessions.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Install Server

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: hierarchy levels are nested per-parent not global, each level is capped at top 20 (with a version-specific measurement), and an empty tree with no time range usually indicates data predates the default window. This goes well beyond the annotations and is highly informative.

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 longer than average but every sentence provides value: purpose, differentiation, behavior, and troubleshooting. It is well-structured with clear topic shifts, but could be slightly tightened without losing information. A strong 4.

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?

Given the tool's complexity, the presence of an output schema, and rich annotations, the description is fully complete. It covers return type (raw spigraph-hierarchy response), hierarchical semantics, limits, and a common failure mode with a remedy. Nothing important appears missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the 'fields' parameter meaning (hierarchy order) and explains how nesting works, but it does not add new parameter-level syntax or formats beyond what the schema already provides. It meets the baseline without exceeding it.

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 states a specific action: building a nested top-N hierarchy across Arkime fields, explicitly naming it a treemap/drill-down. It distinguishes itself from malcolm_aggregate's flat buckets, arkime_multiunique's flat tuples, arkime_spigraph for single-field+time, and arkime_connections for source/destination, making its purpose clear and unique.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly says when to use this tool (for nested hierarchy/drill-down) and identifies alternatives for flat aggregations, single-field+time, and connections. It also provides a practical tip (pass time_from when empty tree) and clarifies the tool's fixed top-20 behavior, giving concrete usage guidance.

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

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/nagameTW/mcp-server-malcolm'

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