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_ous

Lists Active Directory organizational units to inspect OU structure, scope directory searches, and support administration or audit checks.

Instructions

[Organizational Units] [READ] Listar unidades organizacionais (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_list_ous"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
search_baseNo
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 behavioral burden. The [READ] tag indicates a read operation, but the description does not disclose scope, recursion behavior, permission requirements, pagination, or how limit/search_base affect results.

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 short, front-loaded, and uses category/read tags efficiently. It is not padded, though its brevity comes at the cost of important detail handled in other dimensions.

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 need not be explained. However, with no annotations and no parameter descriptions, the definition leaves out key context needed to invoke the tool correctly, especially the purpose of limit/search_base and how this list differs from related OU tools.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The tool has three optional parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not mention any of them. It provides no meaning for limit, search_base, or correlation_id, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 and resource: list organizational units (OUs), reinforced by the [READ] tag. It is clearly distinguishable from create/update/delete/get OU tools, but it does not distinguish itself from nearby list-style siblings such as ad_get_ou_hierarchy.

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_get_ou_hierarchy or ad_list_ou_objects. The description only implies that it lists OUs and gives no exclusions or selection criteria.

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