sectora

assess_tech_risk

Assess security risk for a list of technologies. Returns known CVEs affecting each technology with severity breakdown. Input: comma-separated technology names only.

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": {
      "technologies": "<technologies>"
    },
    "name": "assess_tech_risk"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`technologies`	Yes	Comma-separated list of technology names (e.g., "Apache HTTP Server, OpenSSL, nginx"). Max 50 technologies.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 1, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses returns CVEs and severity but does not mention safety (read-only), authentication, or rate limits. Adequate but could be more explicit.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, then input format. Highly concise.

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

Completeness4/5

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

No output schema, but description mentions return of CVEs with severity breakdown. For a simple tool with one parameter, this is fairly complete, though could detail the return structure more.

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 covers parameter well (100% coverage). Description adds practical constraint of max 50 technologies, which is not in schema description. Adds value beyond 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?

Clearly states verb 'assess' and resource 'technologies', and describes output 'known CVEs with severity breakdown'. Differentiates from siblings like lookup_cve.

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?

Specifies input format 'comma-separated technology names only' but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like lookup_cve or assess_dependency.

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

All sectora 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?