vulnerable.now

Look up a product

get_product

Read-onlyIdempotent

Every known vulnerability in one vendor product, such as an operating system, browser, server, CMS or appliance, most urgent first, with the affected versions and fixes. The vendor is optional: with only a product name, a clear match is answered directly and otherwise the candidates are listed. Give a version to learn which entries affect it and the lowest upgrade that clears them.

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": {
      "product": "<product>"
    },
    "name": "get_product"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sort`	No		priority
`limit`	No
`cursor`	No	next_cursor from the previous page.
`vendor`	No	Optional vendor name, such as Apache or Fortinet.
`product`	Yes	The product name, such as WordPress, nginx, Tomcat or FortiOS.
`version`	No	Optional exact version to check, such as 6.4.2.
`only_affected`	No	With version, list only the entries that affect it.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No
`total`	No
`counts`	No
`version`	No
`matching`	No
`candidates`	No	When the product name is ambiguous: vendor and product pairs to call again with.
`technology`	No	The vendor and product matched.
`next_cursor`	No
`index_complete`	No
`vulnerabilities`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, closed-world and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description contributes real behavioral detail beyond them: urgency-first ordering, and the ambiguous-name fallback where a clear match is answered directly and otherwise candidates are listed. It says nothing about paging behavior or result size limits.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences that each carry information, with the core purpose first and the parameter guidance after. The product-category list ('operating system, browser, server, CMS or appliance') is slightly padded but does usefully widen interpretation of the product field.

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?

For a 7-parameter read tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies the non-obvious parts: default ordering, name-resolution fallback, and version-based filtering. Remaining gaps (pagination semantics, meaning of sort values) are already handled by the schema.

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 71%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns more by explaining what providing vendor and version actually does (restricted result set, affected entries, lowest clearing upgrade). It leaves sort, limit, cursor and only_affected to the schema, which documents them adequately.

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 resource and scope: 'Every known vulnerability in one vendor product ... with the affected versions and fixes', plus default ordering ('most urgent first'). This is clearly not get_vulnerability (single entry) or get_package, but the description never names a sibling to sharpen the boundary.

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 concrete usage conditions: vendor is optional, a bare product name either resolves directly or returns candidates, and supplying a version changes what is reported. It offers no explicit when-not-to-use or named alternative tool, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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

All vulnerable.now 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?