Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA-MCP

IDA-MCP

by Captain-AI-Hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Get String

get_string

Read null-terminated strings from specified addresses in an IDA Pro database; optionally set a maximum length and target a specific instance.

Instructions

Read null-terminated string(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": {
      "addr": "<addr>"
    },
    "name": "get_string"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addrYesAddress(es) - single or comma-separated
max_lenNoMaximum string length
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

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers almost nothing: no mention of what happens on unmapped/invalid addresses, how truncation at max_len is reported, whether partial reads or errors are returned, or what the response looks like (raw string vs. list).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler, but it is terse to the point of under-specification for a tool with four parameters and no annotations. Concise without being informative.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description must cover return shape and edge-case behavior, and it does neither. An agent cannot tell whether multiple addresses yield a map, a list, or concatenated text, nor how failures are surfaced.

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%, with per-parameter docs including the multi-address comma syntax and the instance_id precondition, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no meaning beyond it, which is the baseline 3 for a fully documented schema.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource ("Read null-terminated string(s)") that an agent can act on. It does not distinguish this from nearby siblings like list_strings, search_text, or get_bytes, so an agent must infer that this reads a string at a specific address rather than enumerating or searching.

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 when-to-use guidance and no exclusions. With siblings such as list_strings (enumerate strings), search_text (find text), and get_bytes (raw memory), the description never says which one to pick or when this is preferred.

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