Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
re-lief

re-lief

by Heretek-RE
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

parse_binary

Detect binary file format (PE, ELF, MachO) and extract normalized header with hashes, architecture, entrypoint, and format-specific fields like imphash, PIE, NX, RELRO, code signature.

Instructions

Auto-detect the format of path and return a normalized header dict.

Returns hashes, format name, architecture, entrypoint, and format-specific fields (imphash for PE, PIE/NX/RELRO for ELF, code signature for MachO, 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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "parse_binary"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, or potential side effects. It only describes the output.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the primary action and list key return values without unnecessary detail.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description covers basic functionality and return fields but omits details about the dict structure or usage context among many sibling tools.

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?

The description explains that 'path' is a file path for auto-detection, adding meaning beyond the schema which only specifies type and requirement. This compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 clearly states it auto-detects format and returns a normalized header dict with specific fields listed, distinguishing it from more specialized sibling tools.

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?

The description implies this is the primary entry point for binary analysis, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like get_imphash or get_sections.

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