tie-mcp-server

search_ad_objects

Search Active Directory objects for deviations detected by a specific checker under a given profile, with optional filters for date range, directories, and reasons.

Instructions

Search all AD objects having deviances by profile by checker Note: profileId selects a configuration profile (a lens, not a container). If the user has not specified a profile, call get_preferred_profile (or get_preferences) and use preferredProfileId — do not assume profile 1.

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": {
      "profileId": "<profileId>",
      "checkerId": "<checkerId>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "search_ad_objects"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	Yes	Validates GET /ad-objects/ params
`page`	No	Query parameter: page
`perPage`	No	Query parameter: perPage
`checkerId`	Yes	Path parameter: checkerId
`profileId`	Yes	Path parameter: profileId

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must bear burden. It clarifies profileId semantics but does not state if the tool is read-only, what it returns, or pagination 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded purpose, no extraneous words. Efficiently delivers core action and critical note.

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?

Given nested body object and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, pagination, or significance of body fields like expression, which is essential for correct invocation.

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?

Schema covers all parameters (100%), but description adds value by clarifying the profileId parameter's role as a lens and providing a usage note. The body parameter's schema description is vague, but the description does not elaborate on body fields.

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?

Description clearly states the tool searches AD objects with deviances by profile and checker, distinguishing it from siblings like list_ad_objects which likely lists all AD objects without deviance filtering.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Provides explicit guidance on using profileId (call get_preferred_profile if not specified), but does not mention when to use alternatives like list_ad_objects for non-deviance searches.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server