Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
IDA Pro MCP

IDA Pro MCP

by Moer2831
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

make_signature_for_range

Create a byte signature for a specified address range, with optional operand wildcarding. Useful for hook development and binary analysis without uniqueness guarantees.

Instructions

Create a byte signature for a specific address range (e.g. a selected region). Unlike make_signature, this does NOT guarantee uniqueness — it simply encodes the bytes in the range with optional operand wildcarding.

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": {
      "start": "<start>",
      "end": "<end>",
      "instance_id": "<instance_id>"
    },
    "name": "make_signature_for_range"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
endYesEnd address or name (exclusive, e.g. '0x401020')
startYesStart address or name (e.g. '0x401000')
formatNoOutput format: 'ida' (default), 'x64dbg', 'mask', or 'bitmask'ida
instance_idYes必须提供的 instance_id（或 client_id），用于将请求精确路由到特定的 IDA 实例。请先调用 instance_list 查看并选择合适的客户端 ID。
wildcard_operandsNoWildcard instruction operands for relocatable signatures (default: true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose a meaningful trait: the result is NOT guaranteed unique, unlike make_signature. But it omits operational context such as the instance-routing requirement (instance_id must be supplied and chosen via instance_list) and whether the operation is read-only or mutating. Useful but incomplete behavioral disclosure.

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 tightly written sentences with the core purpose and the differentiating constraint front-loaded ahead of the caveat. Zero filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 5-parameter tool with full schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, scope, and the non-uniqueness caveat adequately. The main residual gap is the instance-routing prerequisite, which the description never surfaces.

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 documents start, end, format, instance_id, and wildcard_operands. The description only restates the range concept and hints at operand wildcarding ('optional operand wildcarding'), adding little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Create a byte signature for a specific address range') with a concrete example, and it explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling make_signature by naming it and stating the key difference (no uniqueness guarantee). An agent can tell this apart from make_signature and make_signature_for_function without opening any schema.

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?

It gives a clear selection condition: use this when you want to encode a byte range without requiring uniqueness, e.g. a selected region. It names the alternative make_signature and the tradeoff. It does not, however, address when to prefer make_signature_for_function over this tool, leaving one sibling relationship implied rather than stated.

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