Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
adversarial-rea

adversarial-rea

by Cultistsid
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

get_strings

Extract and classify printable strings from a binary to surface credentials, URLs, paths, and dangerous functions for security triage, with filters for length, category, and relevance.

Instructions

Extract and classify strings from binary (credentials, URLs, paths, etc.)

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": "get_strings"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryNoFilter by category (credential_related, url, path, dangerous_function, etc.)
min_lengthNoMinimum string length
target_pathYesPath to target binary
interesting_onlyNoOnly return security-relevant strings
reveal_sensitiveNoExplicitly reveal sensitive string categories (local use only)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

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 must carry the full behavioral burden. It does not describe whether the operation is read-only, how sensitive data is handled by default, what reveal_sensitive changes, or what kind of output to expect. The phrase 'credentials' hints at sensitive content but gives no behavioral detail.

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?

The definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted text. It is appropriately sized for a simple extraction tool, though it is slightly too terse to carry important operational context.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and five parameters, the one-line description leaves significant gaps. It does not explain default behavior, the meaning of interesting_only versus reveal_sensitive, security implications, or how results are returned.

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 five parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description's examples (credentials, URLs, paths) loosely match the category parameter, but it adds no syntax, defaults, or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Extract and classify strings from binary.' It also gives examples of extracted categories (credentials, URLs, paths). It does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as find_dangerous_patterns or check_security, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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 states what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives. It does not mention sibling tools like find_dangerous_patterns, get_symbols, or check_security, nor does it describe exclusions or prerequisites.

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