Skip to main content
Glama
nobrainer-tech

langflow-mcp-server

by nobrainer-tech
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_authz_audit

Query authorization audit logs with filters for user, action, result, resource, or event class, plus pagination, to investigate access decisions and policy activity.

Instructions

Query the authorization audit log with filters and pagination.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number
sizeNoPage size
eventNoInclude rows matching any of these details.event classes
sinceNoStart timestamp (ISO 8601)
untilNoEnd timestamp (ISO 8601)
actionNoFilter by audit action
resultNoFilter by result outcome
user_idNoFilter by user ID
actor_idNoFilter by credential actor UUID
actor_typeNoFilter by credential actor type; unknown also includes legacy rows without a type
resource_idNoFilter by resource ID
exclude_eventNoExclude these details.event classes; legacy unclassified rows remain included
resource_typeNoFilter by resource type
exclude_actionNoExclude rows matching any of these action names

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv4.12.2
    • addedInput schema / properties / actor_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filter by credential actor UUID",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / actor_type
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filter by credential actor type; unknown also includes legacy rows without a type",
+  "enum": [
+    "user",
+    "api_key",
+    "unknown",
+    "anonymous_public"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / event
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Include rows matching any of these details.event classes",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / exclude_action
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Exclude rows matching any of these action names",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / exclude_event
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Exclude these details.event classes; legacy unclassified rows remain included",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / result / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "allow",
+  "deny",
+  "owner_override",
+  "skip"
+]
  2. First observedv4.11.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
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 burden. It mentions 'filters and pagination' but does not disclose read-only nature, permission requirements, rate limits, pagination defaults, or return format. This is minimal behavioral context for a query tool.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. No wasted words. However, given the tool has 14 parameters, the description is arguably too terse for its complexity, keeping it from a perfect score.

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 14-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is far too thin. It doesn't explain what the audit log contains, how filters interact, pagination defaults, or response structure. This is inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so all 14 parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter semantics (e.g., how filters combine, default values). Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb ('Query') and resource ('authorization audit log'), plus scope ('filters and pagination'). It does not differentiate from siblings, but no sibling tool covers audit log querying, so the purpose remains clear and distinct. A 4 is appropriate because the description is clear but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 when-to-use guidance, alternatives, or prerequisites are provided. The description implies usage for querying the audit log but gives no context on when to prefer this over other methods (e.g., direct log access) or any exclusions. This leaves the agent without usage direction.

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