iSuite Operations MCP Server

list_user_activity

Retrieve audit log entries for a specific user by providing user ID and time range. Filter activity to track user actions and system changes.

Instructions

List all audit log entries for a specific user within a time range.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "userId": "<userId>"
    },
    "name": "list_user_activity"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`userId`	Yes	The user ID or username to retrieve activity for.
`dateFrom`	No	ISO-8601 start datetime.
`dateTo`	No	ISO-8601 end datetime (default: now).
`limit`	No	Maximum results to return (default 100).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jun 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits (e.g., permissions required, return format, pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter, ordering). The description is too minimal.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Single sentence, no unnecessary words, front-loaded with key information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain what properties the returned entries contain, nor does it clarify how the limit and date range interact, especially given many sibling tools with similar purpose.

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 schema already documents parameters. The description does not add extra meaning beyond reinforcing the scope, but it is adequate.

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 the verb 'list', resource 'audit log entries', and scope 'for a specific user within a time range', making it distinct from siblings like search_audit_logs or get_audit_log.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_audit_logs or export_audit_trail. No context for exclusions or prerequisites.

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