Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA-MCP

IDA-MCP

by Captain-AI-Hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Linear Disasm

linear_disasm

Disassemble instructions from any address, including outside function boundaries, to inspect raw code in IDA Pro. Specify a start address and optional instruction count for targeted reverse engineering.

Instructions

Linear disassemble from arbitrary address (not limited to functions).

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": {
      "start_address": "<start_address>"
    },
    "name": "linear_disasm"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoMax number of instructions (1..64)
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.
start_addressYesStarting address

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

B3.2/5.0
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, yet it says nothing about whether this is a read-only operation, whether it can fail on unmapped/invalid addresses, or what form the output takes. It also omits interaction with the `instance_id`/`timeout` behavior that a multi-database session implies.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the differentiating qualifier is placed immediately after the verb phrase. It is efficient, though arguably under-specified rather than optimally concise.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 4-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers the address-scope question but leaves the agent guessing about return shape (instruction list? text?), read-only safety, and failure modes on bad addresses.

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%, including the crucial `instance_id` requirement note, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds only the notion that `start_address` may be arbitrary rather than function-bounded, which is a small but real contribution.

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+resource ('Linear disassemble') plus the qualifier 'from arbitrary address (not limited to functions)' which implicitly separates it from the sibling `disasm`. It doesn't name the sibling, but the scope contrast is explicit enough for an agent to tell them apart.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The parenthetical 'not limited to functions' implies when this is preferred over function-scoped disassembly, but it never names `disasm` or states an explicit rule such as 'use disasm when inside a known function'. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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