Skip to main content
Glama
intruder-io

intruder-mcp

Official

list_targets

Retrieve all targets in your Intruder account with their IDs and current status to monitor scanning progress and manage security assessments.

Instructions

    List all targets in the Intruder account and their associated IDs and status (one of 'live', 'license_exceeded', 'unscanned', 'unresponsive', 'agent_uninstalled').
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function for the 'list_targets' MCP tool. It is decorated with @mcp.tool() which registers it, fetches all targets via the API client, formats them as a string list, and returns it.
    @mcp.tool()
    async def list_targets() -> str:
        """
        List all targets in the Intruder account and their associated IDs and status (one of 'live', 'license_exceeded', 'unscanned', 'unresponsive', 'agent_uninstalled').
        """
    
        targets = api.list_targets_all()
        formatted = [f"{target.id} - {target.address} ({target.target_status})" for target in targets]
        return "\n".join(formatted)
  • Supporting helper method in the IntruderAPI class that implements pagination to retrieve all targets by repeatedly calling the paginated list_targets API endpoint.
    def list_targets_all(self, address: Optional[str] = None, target_status: Optional[str] = None) -> Generator[Target, None, None]:
        offset = 0
        while True:
            response = self.list_targets(address=address, target_status=target_status,
                                       limit=100, offset=offset)
            for target in response.results:
                yield target
            if not response.next:
                break
            offset += len(response.results)
  • The @mcp.tool() decorator registers the list_targets function as an MCP tool.
    @mcp.tool()
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states what data is returned (targets with IDs and status) but lacks behavioral details such as pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, error conditions, or whether it's a read-only operation. The description is minimal and doesn't compensate for the absence of annotations.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('List all targets') and specifies key return attributes. There's no wasted verbiage, but it could be slightly more structured (e.g., by separating purpose from output details) for optimal clarity.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but has gaps. It explains what is returned but not the format or behavioral context. For a list operation in a security tool context, more details on scope (e.g., all targets vs. filtered) or usage would improve completeness.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (though empty). The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, so it meets the baseline of 4 for no parameters. It appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose without unnecessary parameter details.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'all targets in the Intruder account' with specific attributes (IDs and status). It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_targets' or 'delete_target' by focusing on retrieval rather than mutation. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list tools like 'list_scans' or 'list_issues' beyond the resource name.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when-not-to-use scenarios, or compare with siblings like 'list_scans' or 'list_issues' for related tasks. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/intruder-io/intruder-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server