Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
errorbar

errorbar

by omnia-v
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list audit tombstones

list_audit_tombstones
Read-onlyIdempotent

List acknowledged audit-chain gaps with recorded reasons to distinguish known loss from tampering. Returns tombstone details sorted by sequence.

Instructions

List acknowledged audit-chain gaps (tombstones) with the recorded reason for each lost slot, so a known loss can be distinguished from tampering. GET /v1/audit/tombstones (API-key scope: read). Returns: { tombstones: [{ seq (integer), reason, created_at (ISO) }] } sorted by seq ascending Notes: The audit chain is platform-global, so this list is the same for every workspace. Cache-Control: no-store.

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": "list_audit_tombstones"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.5.1

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Even though annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, the description adds substantial behavioral detail: the API-key scope ('read'), the response format sorted by seq ascending, the platform-global nature, and Cache-Control: no-store. This enriches the agent's understanding beyond the structured annotations.

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?

The description is compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, then gives endpoint, scope, return format, and a critical scoping note. No sentence is redundant or filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a parameterless read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers everything needed: what it returns, the field types, sort order, authentication scope, and the cross-workspace consistency caveat. An agent can invoke it correctly without further context.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The description correctly documents the endpoint and return fields, satisfying the baseline for a parameterless tool.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('List'), a precise resource ('acknowledged audit-chain gaps (tombstones)'), and the reason for using it ('so a known loss can be distinguished from tampering'). It also includes the HTTP endpoint and return shape, making it unmistakably distinct from siblings like create_audit_tombstone or get_audit_verification.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives a clear use case: distinguish a known audit loss from tampering. It also notes the audit chain is platform-global and identical across workspaces, which is relevant context for when to call it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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