Skip to main content
Glama

Lattice

by io.namiq
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Answer a multi-hop question

graph_path
Read-onlyIdempotent

Answer a fixed multi-hop question from an external id. Templates: cve-context (start: CVE), cve-to-defense (start: CVE), technique-coverage (start: Technique), weakness-chain (start: Weakness), actor-ttps (start: ThreatActor/Malware/Campaign). cve-to-defense gives the techniques a CVE enables and the detections and procedures for them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesExternal id to start from; it must be of a kind the template starts from (see the template list in the tool description).
labelNoOptional node label (type) to restrict the answer to, for example CVE, Technique or Detection. The valid labels are listed by graph_meta; an unknown label is refused with the valid ones.
templateYesName of the path template, one of: cve-context, cve-to-defense, technique-coverage, weakness-chain, actor-ttps.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Added value: +"External id to start from; it must be of a kind the template starts from (see the template list in the tool description)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / label / description
      Added value: +"Optional node label (type) to restrict the answer to, for example CVE, Technique or Detection. The valid labels are listed by graph_meta; an unknown label is refused with the valid ones."
    • addedInput schema / properties / template / description
      Added value: +"Name of the path template, one of: cve-context, cve-to-defense, technique-coverage, weakness-chain, actor-ttps."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds template semantics and one concrete output shape for cve-to-defense, but says nothing about latency, result size, or how the multi-hop answer is structured beyond that one template.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded purpose followed by a compact template enumeration; every clause carries information. The trailing sentence singling out cve-to-defense is slightly uneven in weight but not wasteful.

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

Completeness3/5

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

There is no output schema, so the description should carry more of the return-shape burden; it only fully describes one of five templates' outputs. For a multi-hop traversal tool with three parameters this is adequate but leaves meaningful gaps for four of the five modes.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning the schema lacks: which node kind each template starts from, and what cve-to-defense returns. This is required reading because the schema's 'id' description defers the template/start-kind mapping to the tool description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Answer a fixed multi-hop question from an external id', and enumerates the five templates with their entry node kinds. It is clearly distinguished in spirit from single-hop siblings like graph_lookup or graph_neighbors, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

The template list with start-node kinds gives real selection guidance for choosing between the five modes, and the 'fixed' wording implies predefined questions. There is still no stated when-not-to-use or routing to sibling tools such as graph_lookup for single-hop facts.

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

All Lattice toolsInspect
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