Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Microsoft Active Directory MCP Server

Microsoft Active Directory MCP Server

by nks1097
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

ad_get_disabled_accounts

Retrieve and list disabled Active Directory accounts to support security audits, access reviews, and compliance checks. Use it to identify inactive or revoked user accounts.

Instructions

[Security & Audit] [READ] Listar contas desabilitadas.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "ad_get_disabled_accounts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
correlation_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
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 disclosure burden, and it delivers only the '[READ]' tag. It says nothing about permissions required, pagination behavior, or how large result sets are handled.

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 single sentence is efficient and front-loaded with category tags, so nothing is wasted. But its brevity is under-specification rather than true conciseness, given the missing parameter and usage context.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, but with zero annotation coverage and zero parameter coverage, the description should at minimum cover pagination and read-only behavior. It covers neither.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%. Neither 'limit' (default 100, presumably a maximum result count) nor 'correlation_id' (presumably a tracing identifier) is explained in the description, leaving both parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 states a specific verb+resource pair ('Listar contas desabilitadas') that an agent can map directly to the tool name, and the category/read tags help place it. It does not, however, differentiate itself from adjacent siblings like ad_get_locked_accounts, ad_get_inactive_users, or ad_list_users.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. An agent must infer from the name alone whether disabled accounts overlap with locked or inactive accounts, which is exactly the ambiguity the sibling set creates.

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