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_ou_hierarchy

Returns the complete organizational unit hierarchy from Active Directory, enabling you to view and navigate the OU structure for management and auditing.

Instructions

[Organizational Units] [READ] Consultar hierarquia completa de OUs.

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_ou_hierarchy"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
correlation_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
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. It only indicates that the tool is a read operation and retrieves the full hierarchy; it does not mention permissions, domain/DC context, rate limits, or other operational behavior.

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 very short and front-loads useful tags, with no wasted sentences. However, it is arguably under-specified rather than optimally concise, since it omits guidance an agent would need for routing and parameter use.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool has an output schema, so return values need not be explained, and no required parameters reduce invocation risk. Still, given no annotations and zero schema description coverage, the description should do more to clarify operational scope and the correlation_id parameter.

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?

The schema has only one optional parameter (correlation_id) at 0% description coverage. The description does not explain this parameter at all, so an agent gains no semantic guidance beyond the schema name.

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 names a specific operation (query the complete OU hierarchy) and tags the resource as organizational units. It is clear what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools such as ad_list_ous or ad_get_ou.

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 like ad_list_ous or ad_get_ou. The '[READ]' tag implies read-only usage, but no conditions, exclusions, or alternative routing are stated.

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