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

Microsoft Active Directory MCP Server

by nks1097
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

ad_list_domains

Lists all domains available in an Active Directory forest to help identify directory targets for administration, auditing, or diagnostics.

Instructions

[Domain & Domain Controllers] [READ] Listar dominios disponiveis na floresta.

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_list_domains"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
correlation_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; it does signal read-only behavior via the '[READ]' tag and bounds the result set to the forest, which is useful. It says nothing about authentication/privileges required, whether it enumerates trusted or only in-forest domains, or result limits.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the category and read-only tags before the action. Nothing extraneous; every element earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the operation is a low-risk enumeration. However, with zero annotations the description should at least clarify forest scope semantics and routing against the many overlapping discovery siblings; it does not.

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?

There is one optional parameter (correlation_id) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not mention it. Because the tool is callable with no arguments and the parameter is an operational tracing ID rather than a semantic filter, this is a minor gap rather than a blocking one.

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 concrete verb and resource ('Listar dominios') and scopes it ('na floresta'), which cleanly distinguishes it from ad_list_domain_controllers and ad_get_domain_info. It is clear but does not explicitly name the siblings it differs from.

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 versus ad_get_forest_info, ad_get_domain_info, or ad_list_domain_controllers. The only implied usage is 'discovery', which the agent must infer from the phrase 'in the forest'.

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