securedact-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Score Discussions Admin

analyze_text

Inspect text locally to identify PII, secrets, and credentials, returning counts and optional findings without altering or transmitting the text.

Instructions

Inspect text locally and report detected sensitive content without producing sanitized output.

Use this when you need to understand what PII, secrets, or credentials are present (counts, entity types, and, with review/debug modes, positions) but do not need redacted text for transmission. The original text is not modified and no sanitized representation is returned. For a policy-approved, ready-to-send result use prepare_for_external_ai; for a sanitized file use create_safe_copy; for reversing a prior local session use restore_text.

Returns a JSON object with 'status' ('ok', 'review_required', or 'blocked'), 'policy', 'policy_version', 'policy_digest', 'counts' (entity-type tallies), and, when response_mode is 'review' or 'debug', a 'findings' list. 'debug' additionally returns 'debug_details'.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes	Free text to inspect locally for sensitive content. Processing is on this machine only; the original text is never modified or transmitted.
`policy`	No	Named analysis policy controlling which detectors and entity types apply. Defaults to 'default'. Common values include 'default'; other policies may be registered in your environment. An unknown name returns a policy_not_found error.	default
`response_mode`	No	Level of detail returned. 'minimal' returns only status and entity-type counts; 'review' additionally returns a 'findings' list with spans and entity types; 'debug' additionally returns 'debug_details' (only when debug responses are enabled). Defaults to 'minimal'.	minimal

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.4.2Aug 25, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / policy / description

Added value: +"Named analysis policy controlling which detectors and entity types apply. Defaults to 'default'. Common values include 'default'; other policies may be registered in your environment. An unknown name returns a policy_not_found error."

addedInput schema / properties / response_mode / description

Added value: +"Level of detail returned. 'minimal' returns only status and entity-type counts; 'review' additionally returns a 'findings' list with spans and entity types; 'debug' additionally returns 'debug_details' (only when debug responses are enabled). Defaults to 'minimal'."

addedInput schema / properties / text / description

Added value: +"Free text to inspect locally for sensitive content. Processing is on this machine only; the original text is never modified or transmitted."

Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.0Aug 19, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / response_mode

Added value: +{
+  "default": "minimal",
+  "title": "Response Mode",
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the text is processed locally, never modified, and no sanitized representation is returned. It also discloses conditions like 'debug responses are enabled' and the policy_not_found error, giving a complete picture of side effects and edge behavior.

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?

The description is dense but well-organized: a one-line purpose statement, then usage guidance, alternatives, and return format all in a compact sequence. Every sentence adds value; there is no fluff or repetition, and the critical scoping constraint ('without producing sanitized output') is front-loaded.

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

Completeness5/5

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

The tool has 3 parameters, all fully documented in the schema, and an output schema (implied via the described JSON structure). The description explains the return object thoroughly, including conditional fields for review/debug modes, and covers error behavior for unknown policies. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

All three parameters already have descriptive schema entries (coverage 100%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it explains the effect of response_mode on the return structure, describes the policy error condition, and reiterates local-only processing for the text parameter. This extra context justifies a 4 rather than a baseline 3.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb-resource pair ('Inspect text locally') and explicitly distinguishes the tool by stating it reports sensitive content 'without producing sanitized output.' This clearly differentiates it from siblings like prepare_for_external_ai and create_safe_copy, making its purpose immediately unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this when you need to understand what PII, secrets, or credentials are present... but do not need redacted text for transmission.' It then names three alternatives with their appropriate contexts (prepare_for_external_ai, create_safe_copy, restore_text), leaving no ambiguity about tool selection.

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

Install Server