Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kali Linux MCP Server

Kali Linux MCP Server

by AlessandroAnnini
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

nikto_scan

Scan web servers to detect vulnerabilities and misconfigurations, enabling security professionals to assess web application risks.

Instructions

Scan web servers for vulnerabilities and misconfigurations with Nikto

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": {
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "nikto_scan"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYesTarget URL (e.g., 'http://example.com')
optionsNoAdditional Nikto command-line options

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as network impact, authentication requirements, or potential consequences of scanning. It merely states the intention to scan.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words, making it concise. However, it borders on being too brief.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain what the tool returns or how to interpret the scan results. Given the complexity of a scanning tool, this is incomplete.

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 100%, and the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema descriptions are minimal but present.

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 tool scans web servers for vulnerabilities and misconfigurations using Nikto. However, it does not differentiate from sibling scanning tools like nmap_scan or nuclei_scan.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or when not to use it.

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