Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA-MCP

IDA-MCP

by Captain-AI-Hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Get Basic Blocks

get_basic_blocks

Retrieve basic blocks with control flow information for a function by address or name to analyze binary execution paths.

Instructions

Get basic blocks with control flow information.

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": {
      "addr": "<addr>"
    },
    "name": "get_basic_blocks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addrYesFunction address or name
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

C2.9/5.0
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 burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether analysis must be complete first, what form 'control flow information' takes, or whether results are paginated or error-prone. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is appropriately concise. It could be slightly more informative without becoming bloated, but it avoids waste.

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?

With three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should do more to explain what a 'basic block' result looks like and how it relates to analysis state. It omits any mention of return format, ordering, or the need for completed analysis, leaving meaningful gaps for an agent.

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%, so the schema already documents addr, timeout, and instance_id in detail. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, which matches the baseline of 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('basic blocks') and adds a qualifier about control flow information, so an agent can tell roughly what it does. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as disasm, linear_disasm, or callgraph, which also deal with code structure.

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 gives no indication of when this tool should be used instead of alternatives like disasm, linear_disasm, or callgraph, nor does it mention prerequisites such as requiring prior analysis. An agent has to infer usage entirely from the name.

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