Agent Utility MCP

by dev.workers.insivotron.agent-utility-mcp

inspect_file

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect a Base64-encoded file locally for deterministic structural and security risk signals without executing it, and return a policy-aware decision (allow, notice, confirm or block) under the applicable policy — permissive, balanced or strict, balanced by default.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`policy`	No	Optional policy used to compute the decision: permissive, balanced or strict (default: balanced).
`context`	No	Optional declarative context.
`filename`	Yes	The original filename, including its extension.
`content_base64`	Yes	The complete file content encoded as canonical Base64 (maximum decoded size: 1 MiB).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`risk`	Yes
`valid`	Yes
`checks`	Yes
`sha256`	Yes
`signals`	Yes
`decision`	Yes
`filename`	Yes
`risk_score`	Yes
`size_bytes`	Yes
`detected_type`	Yes
`policy_applied`	Yes
`schema_version`	Yes
`ruleset_version`	Yes
`declared_extension`	Yes
`context_completeness`	Yes

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds valuable context such as 'locally' and 'without executing it', and specifies the decision types and policy default. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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, information-dense sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and efficiently covers safety, decision types, policy levels, and default.

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 rich input schema and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's core behavior, safety characteristics, and policy handling. It is complete for an AI agent to select and invoke this tool effectively.

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 provides 100% parameter description coverage, including details like maximum decoded size and the context parameter's no-effect note. The description only adds the policy options and default, which are already in the schema, so no significant additional meaning is provided.

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 function: inspecting a Base64-encoded file locally for deterministic structural and security risk signals and returning a policy-aware decision. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on file inspection rather than command or URL analysis.

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?

The description implies appropriate usage: when a user needs to analyze file content safely without execution, and mentions policy options and default. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions beyond the implicit distinction from siblings.

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

All Agent Utility MCP 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Each tool targets a distinct input type (tool call, URL, command, file), but analyze_tool_call could overlap with inspect_command when the tool call is a shell command. Descriptions are specific enough to mostly disambiguate.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools follow a verb_noun pattern, but they mix 'analyze_' and 'inspect_' as verbs. The structure is consistent across tools, though the verb choice is not uniform.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools covering the core analysis targets (action, URL, command, file) is well-scoped for a security-analysis utility, not too thin and not overbuilt.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers the main entities an agent would need to analyze, but there are minor gaps such as a tool for managing policies or analyzing other data types (e.g., IP addresses or free-form text).

Resources

Need Help?