cisa-cybersecurity-mcp-server

cisa_get_alerts

cisa_get_alerts

Read-onlyIdempotent

List what CISA has published recently — its combined advisory feed, its alerts feed, or its ICS advisory feed. Each feed is a rolling window of exactly 30 items with no history, no pagination, and no date-range query, so the window's coverage varies from about a week to about two months depending on the feed. For ICS advisory history beyond the window, use cisa_search_ics_advisories, which covers the full corpus back to 2010.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`feed`	No	Which feed to read: advisories (all.xml, ~8 days of coverage), alerts (alerts.xml, ~8 weeks), or ics (ics-advisories.xml, ~2.5 weeks).	advisories
`limit`	No	Maximum items to return. The 30 ceiling is the upstream window, not a server choice.
`since`	No	Keep only items published on or after this date, YYYY-MM-DD. Filters within the fetched window; it cannot reach back beyond it.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cap`	No	The limit that was applied.
`feed`	No	The feed that was read.
`error`	No	Present when the call failed. Absent on success.
`items`	No	Items from the current window, newest first as published.
`shown`	No	Items returned.
`notice`	No	Guidance when the since filter excluded every item.
`window`	No	What the fetched window covers.
`feedUrl`	No	The absolute feed URL this window came from.
`feedTitle`	No	The channel title the feed declares.
`truncated`	No	True when the limit capped the returned items.
`windowCaveat`	No	That the feed has no history, no pagination, and no date query.
`effectiveQuery`	No	The since filter as applied, and how many window items it excluded.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds crucial operational context: each feed is 'a rolling window of exactly 30 items' with no history and no pagination. It also explains the coverage variability by feed, so an agent understands what to expect before invoking.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then key constraints, then the alternative. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler or restatement of structured fields.

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?

For a read-only, idempotent tool with three optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, limits, feed coverage, and the relevant sibling tool. There is no critical missing information for correct invocation or selection.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining the 30-item ceiling is inherent to the upstream feed and that date filtering cannot reach outside the window. This reinforces the semantics of limit and since without duplicating the schema verbatim.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List what CISA has published recently' and names the three feeds: 'combined advisory feed, its alerts feed, or its ICS advisory feed.' It also distinguishes itself from a key sibling by explicitly pointing to cisa_search_ics_advisories for history beyond the window.

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?

The description clearly states when this tool is not appropriate: 'no history, no pagination, and no date-range query.' It also names the exact alternative and its advantage: 'use cisa_search_ics_advisories, which covers the full corpus back to 2010.' This gives an agent actionable routing guidance.

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

All cisa-cybersecurity-mcp-server 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.