Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA-MCP

IDA-MCP

by Captain-AI-Hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Dbg Enable Bp

dbg_enable_bp

Toggle breakpoints on or off at specified addresses to control execution flow in IDA Pro debugging. Pass address-enable pairs and an optional timeout across multiple instances.

Instructions

Enable or disable breakpoint(s).

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": {
      "items": "<items>"
    },
    "name": "dbg_enable_bp"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYesList of {address, enable: bool}
timeoutNoTimeout in seconds
instance_idNoREQUIRED whenever more than one database is open (from open_database's result or list_databases()); optional only while exactly one instance is live.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / instance_id / description
      Previous value: -"Instance id override"New value: +"REQUIRED whenever more than one database is open (from open_database's result or list_databases()); optional only while exactly one instance is live."
  2. First observedv0.9.7

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
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 disclosure burden, and it discloses almost nothing. It does not say whether the debugger must be running (dbg_start), whether addresses must already correspond to existing breakpoints, what happens on an unknown address, whether the change persists, or what is returned. Only the mutation nature of the call is inferable from the verb.

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?

One short sentence with zero padding and the action front-loaded. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of substance rather than being a model of tight writing.

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?

This is a state-mutating debugger tool with a required array-of-objects parameter, a session-scoping parameter, a timeout, and no annotations or output schema. Three words cannot cover the preconditions (active debug session, valid breakpoint addresses) or the effect of the call, so the definition is incomplete for the tool's 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 description coverage is 100%: the schema already documents the items array shape ({address, enable: bool}), timeout in seconds, and the instance_id requirement when multiple databases are open. The description adds nothing beyond this, which is the baseline expectation when the schema is fully documented.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The verb+resource pair ('enable or disable' + 'breakpoint(s)') is specific and identifies the action, but it does not distinguish this tool from siblings dbg_add_bp, dbg_delete_bp, or dbg_list_bps. An agent cannot tell from the text whether this mutates existing breakpoints or creates new ones, nor what 'disable' means (removal vs. suppression).

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 statement of when to use this versus dbg_add_bp (which likely has an enable flag) or dbg_delete_bp. The only implied context is that a debug session exists, and that is left to inference.

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