Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
adversarial-rea

adversarial-rea

by Cultistsid
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

find_gadget_candidates

Identify byte-verified ELF64 x86_64 gadget candidates in a target binary for manual exploit review; returns candidate offsets, not runtime addresses.

Instructions

Byte-verified ELF64 x86_64 gadget candidates, not runtime exploit addresses

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": {
      "target_path": "<target_path>"
    },
    "name": "find_gadget_candidates"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
target_pathYesPath to ELF64 x86_64 target

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It adds useful behavioral context by saying results are 'byte-verified' and not 'runtime exploit addresses', implying a static-analysis search rather than live address resolution. It still omits permissions, scan behavior, result format, and how the limit affects output.

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?

The description is a single short phrase with no fluff, so it is concise. However, it is under-specified rather than well-structured, and its fragmentary form omits basic context that an agent would need to invoke the tool confidently.

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 binary-analysis search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It states the result type and static/runtime distinction but leaves out usage guidance, limit semantics, output expectations, and behavior relevant to scanning an ELF target.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are two parameters, and schema description coverage is only 50%. The schema describes target_path but leaves limit without a description beyond its numeric constraints, and the tool description adds no parameter meaning for either parameter. This does not compensate for the uncovered limit parameter.

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?

The description identifies the specific resource: byte-verified ELF64 x86_64 gadget candidates. It also distinguishes these from runtime exploit addresses, which is a meaningful scope boundary. However, it does not differentiate the tool from sibling tools such as find_dangerous_patterns, disassemble, or analyze_binary.

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 only usage-related cue is the exclusion 'not runtime exploit addresses', which clarifies scope but does not explain when to use this tool instead of alternatives. There is no guidance about prerequisites, when the result is appropriate, or how it relates to sibling binary-analysis tools.

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