Skip to main content
Glama
BigfootBytes

threatlocker-mcp-server

by BigfootBytes
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

ThreatLocker Storage Policies

storage_policies
Read-onlyIdempotent

Query ThreatLocker storage control policies to list or retrieve details on file and folder access rules, controlling which applications can read, write, or execute from specific storage locations.

Instructions

Query ThreatLocker storage control policies.

Storage policies define rules for file and folder access on endpoints — controlling which applications can read, write, or execute from specific storage locations (local drives, USB devices, network shares).

Common workflows:

  • List all storage policies: action=list

  • Search by name: action=list, searchText="USB"

  • Filter by computer group: action=list, appliesToId="group-id"

  • Get policy details by ID: action=get, storagePolicyId="..."

Pitfalls:

  • Read-only tool: storage policy creation/editing is not available via the public API (no documented write endpoint).

  • Storage policies are first-match top-down — permits must be ordered above denies.

Permissions: View Storage Control Policies, Edit Storage Control Policies. Pagination: list action is paginated (use fetchAllPages=true to auto-fetch all pages). Key response fields: storagePolicyId, name, policyType, osType, computerGroupName, isEnabled.

Related tools: policies (application control policies), computer_groups (where policy applies), applications (what the policy permits)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesget=single policy by ID, list=search/list storage policies
osTypeNoOS type: 0=All, 1=Windows, 2=macOS, 3=Linux, 5=Windows XP
pageSizeNoResults per page (default: 25, max: 500)
pageNumberNoPage number (default: 1)
policyTypeNoFilter by policy type (integer). Note: valid values are not documented in the public API/KB; pass only if you know the value from the portal.
searchTextNoSearch text to filter policies
appliesToIdNoComputer group GUID to filter by. Find via computer_groups first.
fetchAllPagesNoFetch all pages automatically (max 10 pages). Default: false (single page).
response_formatNoOutput format: markdown (default, human-readable) or json (structured)markdown
storagePolicyIdNoStorage policy GUID (required for get). Find via list action first.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoResponse data — shape varies by action
errorNo
successYes
paginationNo
Install Server

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description discloses that no public write endpoint exists, that policies evaluate first-match top-down with permits above denies, lists required permissions, states pagination behavior, and notes key response fields. This is rich behavioral disclosure with no contradiction.

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?

Well structured with a clear summary line, common workflows, pitfalls, permission/pagination notes, and related tools. Content is front-loaded and every bullet adds operational value without redundant filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a 10-parameter tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers usage workflows, domain semantics, limitations, permissions, pagination, and key response fields. Nothing essential seems missing for correct selection and invocation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful parameter usage patterns with examples for `action`, `searchText`, `appliesToId`, `storagePolicyId`, and `fetchAllPages`, plus a caveat about `policyType` not being documented in public KB. This exceeds the baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Query ThreatLocker storage control policies.' It clearly ties policies to file/folder access on storage locations and explicitly distinguishes from `policies` as application control policies in the Related tools section.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Provides concrete common workflows for list/get, search, filtering, and pagination, and names `policies` as the related sibling with a parenthetical distinction (application control vs storage control). It doesn't explicitly say when NOT to use this tool or give contrastive conditions, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select correctly.

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

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/BigfootBytes/threatlocker-mcp-server'

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