Skip to main content
Glama
vishalsg42

munim

by vishalsg42
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

find_across_clients

Execute a single catalogue check on every client simultaneously, receiving one row per client with results and supporting evidence. Read-only operation.

Instructions

Run one named check across every client at once.

Returns one row per client with that check's result and the evidence behind it. Read-only, and it never writes.

need is a check name from the catalogue, such as spf_single, dmarc_policy or dkim_present. Use audit_all_clients to run the whole catalogue instead of one check, and ask_across_clients when the question is open-ended rather than one of these.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
needYesWhat to look for, as one of the catalogue check names, for example spf_single or dmarc_policy.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / need / description
      Added value: +"What to look for, as one of the catalogue check names, for example spf_single or dmarc_policy."
  2. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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 states 'Read-only, and it never writes,' which is a key safety disclosure, and explains the return format. This covers the most important behavioral aspects, though it doesn't mention edge cases like invalid check names or client count limits, which are minor for a read-only tool.

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 two concise paragraphs. The first sentence front-loads the purpose and output, the second adds the read-only nature, and the third covers parameter guidance and alternatives. Every sentence earns its place with zero fluff.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, alternatives, and safety. It is fully sufficient for an agent to call it correctly, and the presence of an output schema means return value details are not needed in the description.

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?

The input schema fully describes the single parameter 'need' with examples, and the description reinforces this with the same examples. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds marginal value beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3 without elevating it.

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's action ('Run one named check across every client at once') and its output (one row per client with result and evidence). It explicitly differentiates from siblings by naming audit_all_clients and ask_across_clients, so an agent can pick it without opening schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives: use audit_all_clients for the whole catalogue and ask_across_clients for open-ended questions. It also implies use when you have a specific check name, with no ambiguity.

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