Skip to main content
Glama

Scry

by ai.tunnelmind

scry_stats

Returns aggregate Scry corpus telemetry: total observation count, distinct source IPs, first/last observation timestamps, last-24h activity, and per-protocol breakdowns. Useful as a liveness/density check before issuing per-IP queries — lets an agent decide whether the corpus has enough data to be authoritative.

Use this tool when:

  • An agent is planning a multi-step investigation and wants to know if Scry has corpus density worth querying.

  • You want a 'corpus health' signal in a dashboard or report.

Do NOT use this tool when:

  • You want details about a specific IP — use scry_check.

  • You want sensor fleet size or node identities — never exposed at any tier.

Inputs: none. Returns: total_observations, distinct_source_ips, first_seen_ms, last_seen_ms, observations_last_24h, distinct_source_ips_last_24h, by_protocol, as_of_ms. Cost: free, anonymous, rate-limited. Latency: <100ms typical.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: free, anonymous, rate-limited, low latency, and lists all return fields. No contradictions.

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?

Well-structured with bullet points and sections, but slightly verbose with cost/latency details that could be integrated more concisely.

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?

Given no output schema, the description fully covers return fields, input requirements, and usage context, making it complete for the tool's complexity.

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?

No parameters exist (0 params), so baseline is 4. Description correctly states 'Inputs: none' and explains return values, adding no extra param info needed.

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 it returns aggregate Scry corpus telemetry with specific fields, and distinguishes from siblings like scry_check for specific IP queries.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (planning multi-step investigation, corpus health signal) and when not to use (specific IP details, sensor fleet info), with alternatives specified.

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

All Scry toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a unique resource or operation: single IP lookup, bulk IP lookup, ASN roll-up, country roll-up, campaign detail, campaign list, recent observations, stats, timeseries, tool detail, tool list, and top sources. There is no overlap or ambiguity, and descriptions explicitly state when each tool should or should not be used.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow the consistent pattern 'scry_' plus a descriptive noun (e.g., scry_asn, scry_check, scry_timeseries). The naming is uniform, lowercase with underscores, and logically reflects the tool's purpose.

Tool Count5/5

With 12 tools, the set is well-scoped for a threat intelligence server. It provides sufficient granularity without being overly large or sparse, covering core functionality without redundancy.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers key operations for IP triage, campaign analysis, statistical overviews, time-series trends, and tool detection. There are no obvious gaps; all common use cases for network observation and threat intelligence are addressed.

Resources