ScanLabsAI Security Scanner

scan_website

Run a ScanLabsAI security scan against a website and return a full Markdown vulnerability report (grouped by severity, with descriptions and remediation) that you can analyse, act on, and the user can save as security-report.md. Checks OWASP Top 10, CVEs, SSL/TLS, security headers and DNS. Use deep=true for a comprehensive scan (40,000+ vectors, slower). Only scan sites the user is authorised to test.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	The website URL to scan, e.g. https://example.com
`deep`	No	Run a deep scan (comprehensive, slower). Defaults to false.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output format, grouping by severity, the deep scan behavior with performance implications, and the authorization requirement. It does not mention potential side effects like network traffic, but for a read-only scan this is adequate.

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 concise and front-loaded, stating the core purpose and output in the first sentence. Every sentence earns its place, covering output, scope, deep option, and authorization without redundancy.

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 explains the return format (Markdown report with severity grouping, descriptions, remediation). It also covers scope, deep mode, and authorization, making it complete for a two-parameter tool.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining deep=true performs a comprehensive scan with 40,000+ vectors and is slower, which enriches beyond the schema's simple 'comprehensive, slower' description.

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 runs a ScanLabsAI security scan against a website and returns a full Markdown vulnerability report. It specifies the verb, resource, and output, and distinguishes itself from siblings like lookup_cves and compliance_report by focusing on a comprehensive website scan.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It provides clear context on when to use the tool (for full security scans covering OWASP, CVEs, SSL/TLS, headers, DNS) and includes the important authorization constraint. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the use cases are well implied.

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

All ScanLabsAI Security Scanner tools Inspect

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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are mostly distinct: billing, scanning websites, scanning AI agents, CVE lookup, and remediation guidance all serve clear separate purposes. The main overlap is between compliance_report and scan_website, both assessing sites but from different angles; however descriptions clarify the distinction.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow verb_noun pattern (buy_credits, check_credits, get_fix_guidance, get_pricing, lookup_cves, scan_agent, scan_website). 'compliance_report' is a noun phrase rather than a verb action, slight deviation but not confusing.

Tool Count5/5

8 tools is well-scoped for a security scanning service. Each tool covers a necessary function: billing, pricing, scanning, compliance, CVE lookup, and remediation guidance, without unnecessary bloat.

Completeness4/5

The surface provides core lifecycle coverage for the domain: scanning (web and AI agent), compliance assessment, vulnerability intelligence, fix guidance, and credit management. Minor gaps exist like scan history or saved reports, but the tools handle real-time needs without dead ends.

Resources

Need Help?