Skip to main content
Glama
Mipiti
by Mipiti

edit_trust_boundary

Edit a trust boundary's permitted attack vectors, isolation seal, and crossed assets, creating a new model version with change reason recorded for audit.

Instructions

Edit a trust boundary. Creates a new model version.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tb_idYesID of the trust boundary (e.g., "TB1").
passesNoNew comma-separated AttackVector values the boundary allows through (subset of "Network,Adjacent,Local,Physical"). Use the empty string to set "blocks all"; omit to leave unchanged. Reach-relevant — narrowing or widening this set can flip CO verdicts.
sealedNoNew isolation flag. True declares NO lateral ingress (the only way in is crossing the perimeter — an air-gap / segmented enclave), which lets reachability decisively rule the boundary unreachable; False assumes a lateral pivot is possible. Reach-relevant — changing it can flip CO verdicts. Setting it records an operator attestation of the seal. Omit to leave unchanged.
crossesNoNew comma-separated asset IDs.
model_idYesID of the threat model.
descriptionNoNew description.
seal_sourceNo"attested" | "unattested". Only an operator-attested seal lets reachability decisively rule an objective unreachable past the boundary; an unattested (default/model-suggested) seal is treated as pivotable. Use "attested" to attest a boundary already marked sealed without re-toggling it; "unattested" retracts. An attested seal implies ``sealed``. Requires ``change_reason``.
change_reasonNoRequired when ``passes``, ``sealed``, or the seal attestation actually changes. Captured in the audit trail; documents why the boundary's vector filter, isolation claim, or attestation changed.
server_versionYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that a new model version is created, which is a key side effect. However, it lacks details on permissions, reversibility, or other consequences, such as triggering recomputation or audit trail requirements hinted in the 'change_reason' parameter.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words.

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 9 parameters and an output schema, the description is too brief. It does not explain prerequisites (e.g., trust boundary must exist), error conditions, or the implications of creating a new model version. The output schema likely covers return values, but overall context is minimal.

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?

The schema description coverage is 89% (high), so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. It does not mention or explain any parameters.

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 edits a trust boundary and creates a new model version. The verb 'Edit' and resource 'trust boundary' are specific, and the added context of creating a new version distinguishes it from siblings like 'remove_trust_boundary' or 'get_trust_boundary'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_trust_boundary' or 'remove_trust_boundary'. It only states what the tool does, leaving usage context implied.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Mipiti/mipiti-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server