greynoise-mcp-server

Official

by GreyNoise-Intelligence

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Update Blocklist

update-blocklist

Idempotent

Modify a GreyNoise blocklist by updating its GNQL query, name, IP limit, or enabled status to keep threat filtering current.

Instructions

Update a blocklist's query, name, IP limit, or enabled state.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Human-friendly blocklist name
`query`	Yes	GNQL query whose matching IPs populate the blocklist
`enabled`	No	Whether the blocklist is active
`ip_limit`	No	Max IPs to include
`blocklist_id`	Yes	Blocklist ID (UUID)
`workspace_id`	No	Workspace ID (UUID). Defaults to the workspace the API key is bound to.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`name`	No
`query`	No
`token`	No
`enabled`	No
`ip_limit`	No
`created_at`	No
`updated_at`	No
`workspace_id`	No
`last_ip_count`	No
`entitlement_level`	No
`query_workspace_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.5.5Nov 2, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / ip_limit / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / ip_limit / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "number",
+  "null"
+]
```

removedOutput schema / properties / name / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

addedOutput schema / properties / name / type
```
Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "null"
+]
```

Addedv0.5.3Jul 21, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=true, destructive=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — it does not say whether changing the query repopulates the blocklist's IPs, whether omitted fields are preserved or reset, or whether the API key's bound workspace scoping matters; the 'or' phrasing also suggests a partial update while query is in fact required.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no wasted words. The field list is redundant against the schema but not harmful.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With annotations, a full output schema, and 100% parameter coverage, the structured fields carry most of the load. Still, for a mutation whose query change likely rewrites the blocklist contents, the description should disclose that effect and the required-query constraint.

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 every field including GNQL query syntax and workspace_id default is already documented, and the description only restates those field names. Baseline 3 applies; the 'or' enumeration slightly misrepresents the required query parameter rather than clarifying it.

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?

States a specific verb (update) and resource (blocklist) and enumerates the mutable fields, so the operation is unambiguous. It never differentiates itself from siblings such as create-blocklist, delete-blocklist, or get-blocklist, so an agent must infer that this modifies an existing blocklist.

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 only implied: 'update' signals modifying an existing blocklist versus creating one, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisites, and does not name alternatives. An agent can guess correctly but gets no routing help.

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

Deploy Server