Skip to main content
Glama

vulnerable.now

Search vulnerabilities

search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the whole catalog by words: product, vendor, package, CVE ID, common vulnerability name, research metadata or description text. Best match first by default. Each result says which fields matched. When nothing matches, the reply suggests a broader query.

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": {
      "q": "<q>"
    },
    "name": "search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesWords to search for, such as "openssl", "log4j rce" or "exchange server".
kevNoOnly entries in the CISA KEV catalog.
sortNorelevance
techNoOnly entries naming this vendor or vendor product, as a slug: apache, or apache/tomcat.
limitNo
sinceNoOnly entries published on or after this date (YYYY-MM-DD).
untilNoOnly entries published before this date (YYYY-MM-DD).
cursorNonext_cursor from the previous page.
vendorNoExact vendor name, such as apache or microsoft.
packageNoOnly entries naming this package, as ecosystem:name, such as npm:lodash or pypi:django.
productNoExact product name, such as log4j or exchange server.
severityNoOnly these severities.
ecosystemNoPackage ecosystem, such as npm, PyPI, Maven, Go or crates.io.
exploitedNoOnly entries with reported exploitation (KEV, CISA SSVC, ENISA or VulnCheck KEV).
fix_availableNoOnly entries with a fixed version.
modified_sinceNoOnly entries whose merged record changed at or after this date (YYYY-MM-DD) or time (ISO 8601). Pass the newest modified value from the previous run.
public_exploitNoOnly entries with public exploit code.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNo
exactNoThe entry ID when q is itself an ID.
totalNo
next_cursorNo
vulnerabilitiesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / exploited / description
      Previous value: -"Only entries with reported exploitation (KEV, CISA SSVC or ENISA)."New value: +"Only entries with reported exploitation (KEV, CISA SSVC, ENISA or VulnCheck KEV)."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavior beyond that: default relevance ordering, that each result reports which fields matched, and that a no-match reply proposes a broader query — genuinely useful for handling empty results, which the schema cannot express.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the search scope before ranking and empty-state behavior. Minor redundancy: "Best match first by default" largely restates the sort default of relevance, and the matched-fields note overlaps the existing output schema.

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?

With 17 parameters, 88% schema coverage, an output schema and full annotations, the description only needs to convey intent and edge-case behavior, and it does both. It could add one line on how the many filters narrow results or on pagination via cursor, but for a search tool of this shape it is close to sufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 88%, so the schema itself documents fields like kev, tech, ecosystem, exploited and fix_available. The description's only added semantic is that q matches product/vendor/package/CVE/name/metadata/description text, which extends the q example list slightly but does not explain the 16 filter parameters or how they combine.

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 ("Search the whole catalog by words") and enumerates exactly which fields the query text is matched against: product, vendor, package, CVE ID, name, research metadata, description. That is stronger than a bare name restatement, though it never names a sibling (e.g. get_vulnerability for exact lookup) to draw 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 Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Implicit guidance only: free-text search across the catalog, with "Best match first by default" hinting at the ranking behavior. There is no statement of when to prefer this over the exact-match siblings such as get_product, get_package or get_vulnerability, and no prerequisites or exclusion cases.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources