Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA-MCP

IDA-MCP

by Captain-AI-Hub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Wait For Analysis

wait_for_analysis

Block until IDA auto-analysis of functions, cross-references, and strings completes, ensuring queries return finished results; supports an optional timeout and instance ID.

Instructions

Block until IDA auto-analysis (functions, xrefs, strings) completes.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "wait_for_analysis"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
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

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the single most important trait: the call blocks. However, it says nothing about what happens when the timeout elapses (return vs. error), whether blocking consumes the caller's time budget, or whether the call is safe to repeat. For a potentially long-blocking tool with zero annotation coverage, these omissions matter.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

A single front-loaded clause with a useful parenthetical listing what analysis produces. No filler, no restatement of the title.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Short description, but the tool is simple (2 optional params, no nested objects, no output schema) and the schema already documents the multi-instance constraint. The main residual gap is the absence of any statement about the return value or timeout behavior, which no structured field covers since there is no output schema.

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 a detailed note that instance_id is required whenever more than one database is open, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no meaning about timeout semantics (default null = wait indefinitely? bounded?) beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('block until') plus a specific resource ('IDA auto-analysis'), with the analysis outputs enumerated (functions, xrefs, strings) so an agent knows what state is being waited on. It is not explicitly differentiated from siblings like check_connection or survey_binary, but the blocking semantics are distinctive enough.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this should be called after open_database and before analysis-dependent tools such as list_functions or xrefs_to. There is no explicit when/when-not guidance, no mention of the alternative (e.g. check_connection, survey_binary), and no note on whether calling it on an already-analyzed IDB is a no-op.

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