Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA-MCP

IDA-MCP

by Captain-AI-Hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Infer Types

infer_types

Guess and apply IDA-inferred types at specified addresses or symbols to annotate binary analysis.

Instructions

Guess the type at each address with IDA's type inference and apply it as a guessed type.

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": {
      "addresses": "<addresses>"
    },
    "name": "infer_types"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
timeoutNoTimeout in seconds
addressesYesAddress(es) or symbol name(s) to guess and apply types for (comma-separated ok)
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 behavioral burden and largely drops it. It is a mutating operation ('apply it as a guessed type') but says nothing about whether existing user-defined types are overwritten, whether it fails per-address or aborts, or whether it requires prior analysis.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the missing behavioral detail rather than a sign of density.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves key gaps: what the result looks like, whether types are applied atomically, and how failures on some addresses are reported. The schema covers its side, but the description does not compensate for the absent annotations.

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 all three parameters are already documented, including the instance_id multicloud requirement. The description only echoes 'each address' and adds no syntax or behavior detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is correct.

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?

Specific verb pair ('guess the type ... apply it') plus the resource (addresses) and the mechanism (IDA's type inference). It distinguishes itself adequately from manual setters like set_global_variable_type or set_local_variable_type by naming inference as the source of the type, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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, when-not-to-use, or alternative is given. An agent cannot tell from this text whether to prefer this over set_global_variable_type, set_local_variable_type, or declare_struct, nor what prerequisite state (analysis complete) is needed.

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