mitre-mcp

Get Mitigations

get_mitigations

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve MITRE ATT&CK mitigations for enterprise, mobile, or ICS domains. Filter out revoked or deprecated items, set limits, and paginate results to reduce token usage.

Instructions

Get mitigations from the MITRE ATT&CK framework with token-optimized responses.

Args: ctx: FastMCP request context (injected by the server) domain: Domain to query (enterprise-attack, mobile-attack, or ics-attack) remove_revoked_deprecated: Remove revoked or deprecated objects limit: Maximum number of mitigations to return (default: 20) offset: Index to start from when returning mitigations (for pagination)

Returns: Dictionary containing a list of mitigations and pagination metadata

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`domain`	No	enterprise-attack
`offset`	No
`remove_revoked_deprecated`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`pagination`	Yes
`mitigations`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed9 schema fields changedv0.4.0Sep 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / domain / enum

Added value: +[
+  "enterprise-attack",
+  "mobile-attack",
+  "ics-attack"
+]

addedInput schema / properties / limit

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Limit"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / offset

Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "title": "Offset",
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedOutput schema / $defs

Added value: +{
+  "MitigationResult": {
+    "description": "Single mitigation entry in get_mitigations results.",
+    "properties": {
+      "description": {
+        "title": "Description",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "id": {
+        "title": "Id",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "name": {
+        "title": "Name",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "id",
+      "name",
+      "description"
+    ],
+    "title": "MitigationResult",
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "Pagination": {
+    "description": "Pagination metadata returned alongside paged list results.",
+    "properties": {
+      "has_more": {
+        "title": "Has More",
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "limit": {
+        "title": "Limit",
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "offset": {
+        "title": "Offset",
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "total": {
+        "title": "Total",
+        "type": "integer"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "total",
+      "offset",
+      "limit",
+      "has_more"
+    ],
+    "title": "Pagination",
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+}

removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
addedOutput schema / description
```
Added value: +"get_mitigations result."
```

addedOutput schema / properties

Added value: +{
+  "mitigations": {
+    "items": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/MitigationResult"
+    },
+    "title": "Mitigations",
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "pagination": {
+    "$ref": "#/$defs/Pagination"
+  }
+}

addedOutput schema / required

Added value: +[
+  "mitigations",
+  "pagination"
+]

changedOutput schema / title

Previous value: -"get_mitigationsDictOutput"New value: +"MitigationsResult"

First observedv0.3.1May 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by explaining pagination metadata, token-optimized responses, and the remove_revoked_deprecated behavior, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 a concise summary followed by clearly labeled Args and Returns sections. It front-loads the core purpose and avoids unnecessary fluff, though a slightly tighter format would be even better.

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?

All four parameters are explained, the return shape is described, and an output schema exists, so the agent has enough to call the tool correctly. The only notable gap is the absence of guidance distinguishing this from related mitigation-specific sibling tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining every parameter: domain values, remove_revoked_deprecated meaning, limit, and offset for pagination. However, it states a default of 20 for limit while the schema default is null, creating a minor inconsistency.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get mitigations from the MITRE ATT&CK framework'. It is unmistakably distinct from sibling tools like get_techniques, get_tactics, and get_groups, which target different entities. The 'token-optimized responses' hint adds a useful precision cue.

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 makes it obvious that this tool is for retrieving mitigation objects, but it offers no explicit guidance on when to choose this over the more specific sibling get_techniques_mitigated_by_mitigation. Usage context is 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