Skip to main content
Glama

ContrastAPI

by com.contrastcyber

Bulk CVE Lookup

bulk_cve_lookup
Read-onlyIdempotent

Batch query multiple CVEs (up to 50 per call, same for Free and Pro): retrieve full CVE details for all in 1 request instead of N. By default each CVE's affected_products is truncated to the first 20 entries (total_products reports honest count) and references to the first 10 (total_references reports honest count); pass include_affected_products=true / include_full_references=true to return full lists. Pass include_reference_tags=true to receive references_full=[{url, tags, source}] per CVE in the batch. Pass include_severity_breakdown=true to receive severity_sources/consensus/disagreement per CVE. Use for dependency audits or bulk vulnerability enrichment; use cve_lookup for single CVE. Each successful item carries next_calls — chain with kev_detail (when kev.in_kev=true), cwe_lookup (when cwe_id is present), or exploit_lookup. Free: 30/hr (1 per item), Pro: 500/hr. Returns {results, total, successful, failed, timed_out, partial, summary}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cve_idsYesList of CVE identifiers in format CVE-YYYY-NNNNN (e.g. ['CVE-2024-3094', 'CVE-2021-44228', 'CVE-2023-44487']). Maximum 50 per request (same cap for Free and Pro).
include_reference_tagsNoReturn structured references_full per CVE in the batch [{url, tags, source}]. Same shape as cve_lookup (default: True). Activates tag-first patch detection per item. Set False for legacy clients.
include_full_referencesNoReturn the full references list for each CVE in the batch (default: True). total_references is always emitted. Set False to truncate each item to first 10 entries when payload-bound.
include_affected_productsNoReturn the full affected_products list for each CVE in the batch (default: False, each CVE returns first 20). Set True for bulk dependency audits.
include_severity_breakdownNoReturn severity_sources/consensus/disagreement per CVE in batch. Same shape as cve_lookup (default: True). cvss_v2 and cvss_v2_vector are always emitted (additive non-opt-in). Set False to skip if downstream cannot tolerate the extra fields.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare safe read-only/idempotent behavior. The description adds crucial behavioral details: truncation defaults (20 affected_products, 10 references), flag effects, the addition of next_calls for chaining, rate limits, and the top-level return object. It also notes honest counts (total_products/total_references). This exceeds the annotation baseline and facilitates correct invocation.

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 a single dense paragraph but well-structured: purpose → defaults → flags → use cases → chaining → limits → return shape. Every sentence provides non-redundant information. It is appropriately sized for a tool with 5 parameters and complex behavior.

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 the output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description covers all necessary contextual aspects: batch size limit, when to use vs cve_lookup, output structure, rate limits, and chaining. It even highlights the 'honest count' behavior. No critical gaps are present.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the schema by explaining the practical impact of each boolean (e.g., 'pass include_affected_products=true to return full lists,' 'include_severity_breakdown... cvss_v2 and cvss_v2_vector are always emitted'). It clarifies defaults and trade-offs (e.g., 'Set False for legacy clients'). This adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 immediately states 'Batch query multiple CVEs' and specifies 'retrieve full CVE details for all in 1 request instead of N.' It explicitly distinguishes from sibling cve_lookup by saying 'use cve_lookup for single CVE.' This provides a clear verb+resource+scope and differentiates it from the single-CVE tool.

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?

It gives explicit use cases: 'Use for dependency audits or bulk vulnerability enrichment; use cve_lookup for single CVE.' It also provides chaining guidance with kev_detail, cwe_lookup, and exploit_lookup based on conditions in the response. Rate limits are stated for Free and Pro tiers, making the guidance highly actionable.

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

All ContrastAPI 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

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, with differences between lookup/search/scan/audit for each domain. However, some overlap exists (e.g., email_mx vs email_security_posture, scan_headers vs contrast_scan) which could cause occasional confusion. Overall, boundaries are well-defined.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., cve_lookup, check_headers, bulk_cve_lookup) with all lowercase underscores. Variations like kev_detail or ssl_check are minor and still predictable. No chaotic mixing of conventions.

Tool Count4/5

54 tools is high but justified by the broad cybersecurity scope (CVE, ATLAS, D3FEND, Sigma, domain, email, IOC, scanning). Some redundancy exists (e.g., three email-related tools), but the count is not excessive given the API's comprehensive feature set.

Completeness5/5

The tool set thoroughly covers the threat intelligence and domain investigation lifecycle: CVE/KEV/exploit/CWE, ATLAS/D3FEND/Sigma, DNS/WHOIS/SSL/subdomains, email security, IOC enrichment, and active scanning. No significant gaps are apparent for the stated cybersecurity purpose.

Resources