Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Cybersec Toolkit

Cybersec Toolkit

by 26zl
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_module_info

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve full details for a cybersecurity module, including its description, available tools, and management commands, to plan or run security workflows.

Instructions

Get full details about a module: description, all tools, and management commands.

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": {
      "module": "<module>"
    },
    "name": "get_module_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
moduleYesModule name (e.g. "web", "pwn", "forensics").

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it returns the module description, its tools, and management commands, but says nothing about unknown-module behavior or result size.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the resource first and enumerates the payload; nothing is padded or redundant.

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 one documented parameter, read-only annotations, and an output schema that carries the return structure, the description covers everything needed to invoke the tool correctly. Only the installed/prerequisite condition is left implicit.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, including examples ('web', 'pwn', 'forensics'). The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get') and resource ('module') plus the shape of what comes back (description, tools, management commands). It is distinguishable from sibling get_tool_info by operating on a module rather than a tool, though it never explicitly names that sibling.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite (e.g. must the module be installed first?), and no routing toward alternatives like get_tool_info or list_tools. The agent must infer the context entirely.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools