Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Sophos Central MCP Server

Sophos Central MCP Server

by rijul170
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

sophos_mobile_action_get_logs

Read-only

Request log collection from up to 50 mobile devices for security incident investigation.

Instructions

Request log collection from up to 50 mobile devices for investigation purposes.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "tenant_id": "<tenant_id>",
      "endpoint_ids": "<endpoint_ids>"
    },
    "name": "sophos_mobile_action_get_logs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tenant_idYesTenant UUID
endpoint_idsYesComma-separated device UUIDs (max 50)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description does not clarify whether log collection is asynchronous, whether it triggers a background job, or what response to expect. No mention of timeframes, retries, or follow-up steps, leaving significant ambiguity about the tool's behavior.

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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, directly conveys the core action and resource. Highly efficient.

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?

No output schema forces the description to explain return values or next steps, but it does not. An agent cannot infer what the tool returns (e.g., request ID, status) or that a follow-up tool like sophos_get_forensic_log_status may be needed. Incomplete for a non-trivial action-triggering tool.

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 the schema already fully documents both parameters. The description restates 'up to 50 mobile devices' but adds no semantic nuance beyond the schema's 'comma-separated device UUIDs (max 50)'. Meets baseline but no extra value.

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 clearly states the tool requests log collection from mobile devices for investigation. It specifies the resource (mobile devices), action (request log collection), and purpose (investigation), distinguishing it from sibling actions like sync, locate, or send message.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use, or relationship to related tools like sophos_get_forensic_log_status. The phrase 'for investigation purposes' provides weak context but no explicit decision 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