NIST NVD MCP Server

search_cves_by_cpe

Identify vulnerabilities in products by providing a CPE name or match string, with options to filter by version range and vulnerable status.

Instructions

Find CVEs affecting specific products using Common Platform Enumeration (CPE)

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": "search_cves_by_cpe"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`cpeName`	No	CPE name (e.g., "cpe:2.3:a:apache:log4j:2.14.1:::::::*")
`versionEnd`	No	Ending version for range search (requires virtualMatchString)
`isVulnerable`	No	If true with cpeName, only return CVEs where the CPE is vulnerable
`versionStart`	No	Starting version for range search (requires virtualMatchString)
`resultsPerPage`	No	Number of results per page (1-2000, default: 20)
`versionEndType`	No	Whether versionEnd is inclusive or exclusive
`versionStartType`	No	Whether versionStart is inclusive or exclusive
`virtualMatchString`	No	CPE match string for broader searches (e.g., "cpe:2.3:a:apache:*")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. The description only states the tool's purpose, with no disclosure of behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, or side effects.

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 sentence, 13 words – highly concise. Purpose is front-loaded. However, no structured sections for parameters or usage.

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?

Given 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It lacks details on response format, version range logic, and optional parameter interactions.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the tool finds CVEs using CPE, a specific search method. It distinguishes from siblings like search_cves_by_cvss and search_cves by the use of CPE.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. The description implies CPE-based search, but lacks when-not or alternative suggestions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server