Damn Vulnerable MCP Server (DVMCP)

by Kyze-Labs

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

it.query_audit_log

Search the system audit log for security events. Filter by actor, action type, or time range to identify threats.

Instructions

Search the system audit log for security events. Filter by actor, action type, or time range.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "it.query_audit_log"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`actor`	No	Filter by actor username
`action`	No	Filter by action type
`since`	No	Filter events after this timestamp

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Jun 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of disclosure. It only states the search and filter capabilities, but does not disclose return format, ordering, rate limits, or permission requirements. This is a significant gap for a tool that reads security logs.

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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and then lists the filter dimensions. There is no filler or redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple schema with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits behavioral details such as what the returned results look like, any ordering, or access restrictions, leaving some gaps for a security-related tool.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions, giving 100% coverage. The description's mention of 'actor, action type, or time range' simply echoes the parameter names and does not add additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'search' with a clear resource ('system audit log') and purpose ('security events'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like it.manage_users or it.get_system_config, which handle different IT resources.

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 clearly implies the usage context: investigating security events in the system audit log. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the context and filter options provide clear guidance.

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