Skip to main content
Glama
K4PXD

cve-mcp-server

by K4PXD
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Search CVEs

cve_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search NVD for CVEs by keyword, affected product, severity, known-exploited status, and publication date. Filter results to prioritize relevant vulnerabilities.

Instructions

Search the NIST NVD for CVEs by keyword, affected product (CPE), severity, KEV status, and publication date range.

Args:

  • keyword (string): Terms matched against CVE descriptions.

  • cpe_name (string): CPE 2.3 string to match affected products.

  • severity ('LOW'|'MEDIUM'|'HIGH'|'CRITICAL'): CVSS v3 severity filter.

  • kev_only (boolean): Restrict to CISA KEV entries (default: false).

  • published_after / published_before (ISO-8601): Publication date window (max 120-day span).

  • limit (1-50, default 20), offset (default 0): Pagination.

  • response_format ('markdown'|'json', default 'markdown').

Returns (json): { total, count, offset, has_more, next_offset, results[] } where each result is a full CVE detail object.

Examples:

  • "Critical Apache Struts RCEs" -> keyword="apache struts", severity="CRITICAL".

  • "Known-exploited Fortinet bugs" -> keyword="fortinet", kev_only=true.

Errors:

  • "NVD rejected the request (400)" if a date span exceeds 120 days or a filter is invalid.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoResults per page (1-50).
offsetNoPagination offset.
keywordNoKeyword(s) matched against CVE descriptions, e.g. 'apache struts rce'.
cpe_nameNoCPE 2.3 name to match affected products, e.g. 'cpe:2.3:a:apache:log4j:2.14.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*'.
kev_onlyNoReturn only CVEs present in the CISA KEV catalog.
severityNoFilter by CVSS v3 base severity.
published_afterNoISO-8601 date; only CVEs published on/after this (max 120-day span with published_before).
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' (default, human-readable) or 'json' (full structured data).markdown
published_beforeNoISO-8601 date; only CVEs published on/before this.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavior beyond that: it documents the paginated response shape, the markdown/json default, the 120-day span constraint, and the exact error message for invalid requests.

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 well structured with clear sections: summary, args, returns, examples, and errors. It is appropriately detailed for a 9-parameter search tool, though the Args block partially duplicates schema content rather than strictly adding new information.

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?

With no output schema present, the description compensates by specifying the exact JSON return shape, pagination fields, result semantics, examples, and error conditions. Combined with the read-only/idempotent annotations, an agent has what it needs to invoke and interpret this tool correctly.

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 the schema already explains every parameter accurately. The description largely restates those facts, though the natural-language examples, CPE 2.3 example, and default-format note add minor practical value beyond the schema.

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 opening line uses a specific verb and resource: 'Search the NIST NVD for CVEs' by keyword, CPE, severity, KEV status, and publication date. This clearly differentiates it as a general filtered search tool from siblings like cve_get_details or cve_get_kev, which target specific data retrieval.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives clear search context and concrete examples, such as mapping 'Critical Apache Struts RCEs' to keyword+severity and 'Known-exploited Fortinet bugs' to kev_only=true. It does not explicitly say when to prefer sibling tools like cve_recent or cve_get_details, so it stops short of full alternative-routing guidance.

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