VulnTracker MCP

check_dependencies

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check many product@version pairs in one call. Give the dependencies you read from the repository's manifests (go.mod, package.json / lock files, requirements.txt, pom.xml, Gemfile.lock, Cargo.lock, Dockerfile base images). For each one you get whether VulnTracker matched a product, whether the exact version is known, how many CVEs affect it, the newest affected CVEs with fix versions, and how confident the name match is. Max 50 items per call; batch larger lists.

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": {
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "check_dependencies"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes	Dependencies to check

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only and idempotent safety, and the description goes well beyond them: it enumerates the per-item result fields (match status, version-known flag, CVE count, newest affected CVEs with fix versions, match confidence) and discloses the 50-item rate/limit constraint. That is exactly the kind of behavior an agent cannot get from the structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and scope, then the input source, then the return shape, then the limit. Dense but every sentence carries information an agent needs, especially the return-value enumeration since there is no output schema.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers input provenance, per-item response contents, and batching limits. Nothing material is missing for correct invocation.

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 adds real meaning: it tells the agent where the values come from (repository manifests, with concrete file examples) and that Dockerfile base images are in scope. It restates the 50 cap consistently with maxItems but adds no extra guidance on the optional ecosystem field.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Check many product@version pairs in one call') and the plural/batch framing distinguishes it from the singular sibling check_version. An agent can tell immediately this is the bulk variant.

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?

Gives clear context for when to use it: feeding dependency lists read from manifests, with a hard limit of 50 items and an instruction to batch larger lists. It does not explicitly say 'use check_version for a single pair', so the alternative routing is implied rather than stated.

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

All VulnTracker MCP 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?