Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA-MCP

IDA-MCP

by Captain-AI-Hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Rename Function

rename_function

Rename a function in IDA Pro by specifying its name or address and a new C identifier. Use it to organize and clarify reverse engineering analysis.

Instructions

Rename function. Accepts function name or address.

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": {
      "address": "<address>",
      "new_name": "<new_name>"
    },
    "name": "rename_function"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
addressYesFunction name or address (hex/decimal)
timeoutNoTimeout in seconds
new_nameYesNew function name (valid C identifier)
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 full disclosure burden. It does not explain that this mutates the IDA database, what happens on duplicate names, whether existing references are updated, or how instance_id affects behavior. The only behavioral hint is implicit in the verb 'rename'.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core operation. The second sentence is largely redundant with the schema, but the overall definition is not bloated.

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 is too thin. It omits rename semantics, failure modes, instance selection implications, and any indication of what the operation changes in the database.

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 four parameters including instance_id and timeout are already documented in the schema. The description's 'Accepts function name or address' restates the schema's address description and adds no syntax, format, or validation detail beyond it.

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 specific verb and resource ('Rename function'), so an agent can tell it is a mutation tool for function names. It does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings like rename_local_variable or set_function_prototype, but the resource is clear.

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 says only that it accepts a function name or address. It gives no guidance on when to use this instead of create_function, set_function_prototype, or the local/global rename tools, and no prerequisites are mentioned.

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