io.github.AIops-tools/symantec-edr-aiops

edr_file_entity

Read-only

Retrieve a file entity by SHA-256 hash to support read-only Symantec EDR investigations and endpoint incident analysis.

Instructions

[READ] Read one file entity by SHA-256.

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": {
      "sha2": "<sha2>"
    },
    "name": "edr_file_entity"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sha2`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

readOnlyHint=true is consistent with the "[READ]" prefix, so no contradiction. Beyond the annotation, the description adds only that lookup is keyed on SHA-256; it does not say what happens on a miss (error vs empty), or whether related incident/event data is included.

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 with the operation type flagged first and zero filler. Nothing extraneous is present.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup with annotations covering the safety profile, the description covers what is needed to call it correctly. Only edge-case behavior (not-found, casing) is left unstated, which is minor at this complexity.

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 coverage is 0% and the property is titled only "Sha2", so the description does real work by declaring it a SHA-256. It still omits expected format (hex string, 64 characters) and case sensitivity, which an agent must guess.

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?

"[READ] Read one file entity by SHA-256" gives a specific verb (read) and resource (file entity) plus the identifying key, which separates it from the plural sibling edr_file_entities. The singular "one" implicitly contrasts with a list operation, though the sibling is never named.

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?

Usage is only implied: the agent can infer this is the lookup path when a SHA-256 is already known, versus enumerating via edr_file_entities. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement or mention of the sibling collector tool.

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