Vysion

search_leaks_by_email

Search Vysion's leak database for a specific email address. Returns all leaked files where this email was found. Keep page_size small (5-10) as results can be very large.

Responses:

200: Successful Response (Success Response) Content-Type: application/json

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": {
      "email": "<email>"
    },
    "name": "search_leaks_by_email"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`gte`	No	Date in ISO 8601 format (e.g., '2024-01-01T00:00:00Z' or 'YYYY-MM-DD')
`lte`	No	Date in ISO 8601 format (e.g., '2024-01-01T00:00:00Z' or 'YYYY-MM-DD')
`page`	No	Page number
`email`	Yes	Email address to search for (e.g., 'user@example.com')
`page_size`	No	Results per page (default 5, max 100). Keep low to avoid large responses.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a meaningful trait — results can be very large and the call returns every matching leaked file — which is genuinely useful, but it says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or whether the query is scoped to a tenant/workspace.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The two substantive sentences are well front-loaded and waste-free, including the operative size warning. However, roughly half the text is auto-generated response boilerplate ("### Responses: **200**... Content-Type") that adds no value to tool selection.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 5-parameter search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, result nature, and response-size risk. It omits the date-range filtering capability entirely and gives no indication of result shape or pagination semantics, leaving real gaps for a definition with no structured support.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description earns an increment by repeating the page_size operating guidance (keep it 5-10) that an agent must respect to avoid oversized responses. It still adds nothing about the gte/lte date filters, which are only explained in the schema.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("Search Vysion's leak database for a specific email address") and states what comes back ("all leaked files where this email was found"). It is clearly distinguishable from document/IM-oriented siblings, but it does not name or contrast with the closest alternatives such as search_email_in_im_database.

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?

Usage is only implied: the scope statement (leak database, by email) tells the agent roughly when this applies, and there is an operational hint to keep page_size at 5-10. There is no explicit when-to-use-instead guidance against search_leaks or the IM/document email lookups.

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

All Vysion tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?