PacketMaster

by Jctechbr

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

pm_file_info

Retrieve capinfos metadata and optionally compute SHA-256 hash for a PCAP file.

Instructions

Return capinfos metadata and optional SHA-256 hash for a PCAP file.

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": {
      "file_path": "<file_path>"
    },
    "name": "pm_file_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file_path`	Yes
`compute_hash`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only mentions returning metadata and optionally computing a hash, omitting details like whether the tool modifies anything, performance implications, or dependency on file access permissions.

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 description is a single concise sentence without superfluous words. It could be improved by adding structure, but it effectively communicates the core functionality.

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 that an output schema exists (though not provided), the description partially defines return values. However, with many sibling tools, more context on when to choose this tool would improve completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds some meaning: it implies file_path is a PCAP file path and compute_hash relates to SHA-256. However, it doesn't specify allowed file sources or hash computation overhead.

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 the tool returns capinfos metadata and optionally a SHA-256 hash for a PCAP file. It uses specific verbs and resources, distinguishing it from sibling tools like pm_detect_capture_type or pm_filter_packets.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pm_detect_capture_type or pm_filter_packets. There is no mention of prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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